Slashdot Mirror
Intelligent Transportation Systems
An anonymous reader sends us a link to this story about the U.S. Department of Transportation working on Intelligent Transportation Systems, a long-range plan to build various sorts of intelligence into the national road system. Likely this will result in better traffic monitoring, lots of traffic planning data to analyze to help prevent traffic jams, and less privacy for everyone. The article has a paranoid bent; although they're not wrong that the system will likely facilitate privacy abuses, I wish the author had been a bit more hopeful about possible system designs that would still help alleviate traffic problems without enabling snooping, because obviously such a system could be built if the political will was present to do so.
This is really neat, but I have to wonder this. Why would they build such things without the ability for snooping? There's not enough pressure from the public to do so, and the US government surely isn't going to push for it.
Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
Right now, "smart cars" that can drive themselves are confined to specially-designed test tracks because they're basically stuck operating in a vacuum of information... if cars and roads were able to communicate with each other, we'd be halfway there to having the car take over the highway driving of itself.
Imagine stopping your car at the stop line on the way to the major highway, and simply inputing into the car that you'd like to be dropped off at exit 32A, and then relaxing as the car waits for a suitable break in the traffic flow to bring the car into the stream, and then at a rapid speed taking you to the exit while you're free to read a newspaper.
Of course, the Minority Report scene where once your car is told to take you to the police, that's exactly what it'll do would become possible. However, if the police ever do have a warrant to arrest somebody wouldn't we want technology to tell the police where to find the person whenever possible? Afteral, warrants aren't random things, some judge has already seen enough proof of something illegal happening to warrant bringing the person in.
The White House?
Remember, your right to total privacy ends the moment you step out of the house. Your car already bears a linkable-to-its-owner token in teh form of a license plate. Many of us has willingly added another intentifying device in the form of an electronic toll payer such as EZ-Pass.
see also: Slashdot
Ok, typically I see people advertisng mods for their iPod, XBox, PS2, or refridgerator, and I shrug thinking I'd never bother doing that.
However, this is quite different. If someone posted mods for their 2006 SAAB, I'd be more than interested in figuring out how to use that to patch my vehicle to become anonymous.
<shudder>
Then Al Qaeda will know everywhere we drive! This could be terrible.
submit your SSN and retinal scan for further instructions...
Yeah, right.
I've been dreaming of a system like this since I was a kid. The first time I'd seen it realized was in the movie Minority Report. I'm on the fence about how much privacy I'd give up to make roads more efficient.
...the national transportation tracking system they're creating will be to travel on foot."
This guy obviously has never heard of that newfangled device, the bicycle!
(Not even going to mention Segways. Wait...! D'OH!)
(And yes, I know the article is mainly about highways... but still... this is Slashdot, home of snarky comments!)
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
In the ideal traffic network, everybody would drive at approximately the same speed with a fair cushion of space between each car and faster traffic in the left lane. That careful balance is destroyed with the first SUV driver that's constantly swerving from lane to lane trying to get an extra five or six seconds cut off the trip (not to mention that these large vehicles generally clog the road even when driven normally.)
To improve traffic, we need to continue putting the emphasis on low-fuel consumption and on quality mass-transit. At least until we get robotic cars that operate according to some sort of centralized traffic planner.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Does this car come with stealth?
How much is it extra?
Anyone who lives in the Seattle area and doesn't check the traffic conditions before they hit the freeways is missing out.
It's a nice system, and they're constantly (although slowly) expanding it.
You probably shouldn't click this.
How do they enforce this among drivers of older cars? What if I drive a 67 Mustang, or a 89 Grand Am? My car was made in 1995, and I love it... I'll drive it until it's undrivable. What do they do with me?
Do they force me to buy a new car? What if I can't afford it? Do they force me to install this equipment on my car? Perhaps it might communicate with the onboard computer, but this doesn't solve the problems of older cars without one.
I'm not really worried about people tracking my every move, to be honest. I'm mostly worried about the government tracking how fast I'm going. Most people don't really care about privacy issues, but people aren't going to buy new cars if they tattle on you every time you do 75 on the Interstate.
Personally I'd be happy with traffic lights that were just a little bit smarter. Like:
1. Not turning yellow when there is ONE more car remaining to make a left turn.
2. Trying to prevent cars from waiting multiple cycles in general.
3. Doing very short green lights when there are only a few cars waiting.
4. Adjusting timing based on time-of-day and traffic patterns.
There have been attempts to "smarten up" lights here in Austin, but half the time they just end up misreading the situation and doing something wacky like giving a special left turn green for 30 seconds when there's no one waiting to turn left. Couple that with some of the nation's longest red lights, and you get one of the nation's highest rates of red lights being run.
Even a good web-based feedback mechanism where the public can point out poorly timed lights would be a huge benefit.
Fix that nuisance, and maybe I will believe something greater can be pulled off...
Instead of building it into the road, how about putting some intelligence behind the wheel? What we really need is *HONK* HEY! Watch it buddy! I'm trying to /. here!
What was I saying?
80% of Drivers think they are Above Average
I have been using this for the last few weeks and it's great.
...is "The Gold Coast" by Kim Stanley Robinson. Parts of the book talk about the commuter society in Orange Co. California at the time, the traffic systems, etc.
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
Imagine a world in which employers could only hire people within walking distance of the company. The quality of the workforce would go down and many people would be stuck in jobs that suck. Imagine a world in which the only goods you could buy were those found at tiny neghborhood shops within walking distance. The selection and pricing would suck.
The farther people can comfortably commute to work, the better the match between employer and employee. The farther people can comfortable travel to find goods and services, the better the selection and economies of scale. Current transportation systems (cars, buses, etc.) let people travel greater distances, but introduce stresses and uncertainties (traffic jams). If Intelligent Transportation System can increase the average speed of travel or reduce the uncertainties in travel times, people will enjoy less stress in life, find better jobs and find better goods and services.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Sometimes I feel like the Right to Privacy groups infringe on my right to enjoy and take advantage of some truly incredible technology. If we can put together an intellingent roadway system that saves most of the 42,000 deaths a year, I am all for it. I am not trying to flame the discussion and I truly do understand the issues at hand. However, some of this technology is pretty good and we should consider, thoughtfully, the advantages before stomping the life out of it.
http://www.busyweather.com/
As for the privacy nuts, recall that you have this little thing called a license plate that police can already use to pull down your life history from their cruiser, and this plate is being photographed already to stop red light runners etc.
Would you feel less worried about privacy if you could be guaranteed that certain information gathered would and could only be evaluated by a computer system - and would never pass before the eyes of an human individual or group of individuals?
If, hypothetically this system were 100% secured with, oh say, perfect quantum encryption.
this is hypothetical, ok.
The endgame in this is to have the cars driving themselves. And yes the govt can force you to use one of these devices if you wish to use public roads.
I find this technology to be quite beneficial, especially when implemented in such a nice way. I can just imagine pulling this up on my PocketPC before I leave for the day, and being able to navigate my route home much more easily. If this could be expanded onto surface streets I believe it would help, somewhat, with the traffic problems because people could avoid the bad areas rather than contribute to them due to lack of information.
...because it doesn't address the REAL problem. The real problem isn't accidents and inefficient driving. The real problem is that there are simply too many drivers on too few roads. If ITS is purported to solve other problems, like fuel inefficiencies due to poor driving patterns and accidents, then great, but ITS is advertised as the solution to congestion. NOT
% 25 3D1000%2526cid%253D28906,00.html
Read a new study out from Deloitte research titled: "Combating Gridlock: How Road User Pricing Can Ease Suggestion". I won't try to summarize it here, but if you have 10 minutes, read it:
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/research/0,2310,sid
~sig~He who waits for opportunity to knock will never hear the doorbell~end sig~
It's all over once they attempt to add neural networks to EZ-Pass transponders. I, for one, welcome...
Well, not driving per se, just pedestrians, road construction, and other cars. I'm normally calm and smiling, but put me in a car and I grip the wheel like I'm throttling a small, noisy child, and I could probably embarrass sailors with my salty language.
If there was a car that could safely and reliably chauffeur me around town without me having to raise my blood pressure to dangerous levels, I'd be willing to spend a fair amount of money -- or do without AC/radio/whatever -- for the privilege.
U.S. Department of Transportation working on Intelligent Transportation Systems, a long-range plan to build various sorts of intelligence into the national road system.
Translation for the car industry lobby-unaware:
Many roads are filled to capacity. Most people don't have the physical ability to react quickly enough if they were asked to drive closer to each other, to cram more cars per mile and more car passages per hour. As a result, we auto-makers have lobbied the powers that be to start a program to develop a system to take away control of their vehicles from their human owners/drivers and into the hands of the car computers, or the USDOT's central computer.
Of course, this will be ruinously expensive both to the government, to equip thousands of miles of thoroughfare with computer trackers (or whatever it'll be) and to the consumer, to equip their new "auto-autos" with the right tech wizardry, not to mention new raised roadtaxes etc... BUT BUT... we get to manufacture more cars, which means keeping jobs in the US and keeping the economy going (yeah, right...) and, more importantly, keeping the cash flow in our auto industry CEOs going.
Hint: cars that drive very very close to each other, and follow a road to a tee, and consume very little compared to today's automobiles, and don't need a parking spot, and bring you right into most major cities, already exist: they're called a train, and they've been around forever.
Europe, and most of the world proves that moving people by train is convenient, ubiquitous, and quite livable. The United States proves that lobbying from powerful industries can kill viable, more sustainable transportation solutions very effectively.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I, for one, would like to be the first to welcome our new asphalt overlords.
That said... Has it gotten to the point that the only way our governments will build anything is if they can use it to further erode our privacy all in their quest to "protect" us??
From the way that article was written, you would believe that tin-foil is staple in that author's fashion wardrobe... Semi-Intelligent Transportation is a definate need for the future and the expanding populace desires to keep driving personal automobiles... Just how would this author suggest a realistic approach to the automation of high-density traffic routes to improve safety while reducing or maintaining timeliness? seriously now... "They'll know you're due for a transmission repair and that you've neglected to fix the ever-widening crack that resulted from a pebble dinging your windshield." Transmission repair? Cracked windshield? WHO CARES IF ANYONE KNOWS THIS CRAP.
My fantasy involves a direct connection from my computer to my skull.
That rail be incorporated with cars. You drive your car up on the rail system interface, and suddenly you no longer have to drive the car to get to another city.
God spoke with me:
www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA
God spoke to me.
...bigger things to worry about.
They know where 90% of the traffic problems are. Mostly just more lanes are needed.
I'll wait for my check...
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
All that's needed are some sensors in the roads to tell when they're occupied, just like at redlights. Count the cars as they go by; note the average speed. Do this over several miles of interstate, and you can predict where traffic is going to back up, at which exits and such. A drastic drop in speed indicates some sort of problem on the road.
We don't need AI in cars driving us around, nor do we need rfid tags in our cars. We need intelligent planning as far as highways are concerned.
The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
One thing that worries me, as a motorcycle rider, is where do we figure in? Are we lost in a world where a few seem hell bent on control at any cost?
Granted riding on the slab isn't my ideal way of point A to point B but I have to question, just how many roads will I lose access to if "controlled" becomes the norm? (slab = interstate)
I can deal with items like EZ-PASS and the like. I already have access to HOV lanes, regardless of the logic of it. I am just curious where bikes fit in.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
It drives me crazy to see these attempts to add new technology to attempt to improve the safety and efficiency of our inherently inefficient and non-scalable road infrastructure. With all of the money they spend on technologies like this, plus building and maintaining the roads, traffic lights, etc. and the costs of traffic cops to try to make the roads safer, wouldn't that money be better spent building a mass transit system that was actually scalable?
I live in LA where traffic is a nightmare, despite the extremely wide freeways, metering lights, overpasses everywhere to help with merging between freeways. We keep trying to improve the roads, widening the lanes and building more overpasses, but the fact of the matter is, this infrastructure isn't scalable at all.
We need a mass transit system, and we need to build cities that are pedestrian friendly (build things closer together, and build up instead of out). We need to get people out of their cars and start thinking of cities as a place for people, not a place for cars and parking lots.
This system is just another attempt to improve our outdated transportation system, but the fact of the matter is that it will do nothing to improve the flow of traffic or make our roads safer. The only thing that can really do that is to change the way we think about moving people from one place to another, and getting people out of their cars. It's a total waste of money, and a total invasion of privacy, and we're all going to have to suffer, because the way our cities are built, cars are pretty much the only way to get around. When will we learn.
Exactly. People are able to quickly process unforeseen occurances and compensate for them. Computers can't. They only run code, and if something's not in the programming, they either lock up or return an error code. They don't come up with ideas.
the article has a paranoid bent; although they're not wrong that the system will likely facilitate privacy abuses, I wish the author had been a bit more hopeful about possible system designs that would still help alleviate traffic problems without enabling snooping
Michael couldn't help himself but to portray the article writer as paranoid. The fact of the matter is that author isn't being paranoid at all. Government tracking of individual whereabouts will happen.
But what would you expect from a neo-socialist like Michael Simms. Socialists love government being your big brother.
If you really value your freedom, vote libertarian.
Intelligent cars that can be programmed could be easily controlled by the government. In a worst case scenario this could effectively eliminate public protests and in and of itself could eliminate the remainder of what little we have of freedom of association. When the government can program your car, it can tell it where it can't go.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
I've been working in ITS for 8 years. "Oh, you must mean you work in IT?" Finally I have a nicely written article I can point people to and say "There! That's what I do for a living."
And if any of you think you are currently anonymous... you are not. Using hidden/buried sensors that are already in place on the highways, I can already datamine and figure out exactly where a given large truck goes during his day. If I happen to have a camera at ANY sensor location, I can link him to a license plate. Some cars have a unique enough footprint I can do this already, and within the next few years, the technology will probably be sensitive enough I can identify and track you with nothing installed in your car.
Smart cars and roads can easily track movements, but what I want is to do away with most private vehicles in favor of many, many automated buses and taxis. Have a request button at city hubs and intersections. Have some sort of anonymous payment system.
Every time I am on the highway, it seems like an awful waste for all the cars going one direction. If the passengers piled into fewer cars or buses, it would do a lot to help reduce emmissions and road costs. Having the cars automated lowers the operating cost.
In fact, we could already emulate this model to a certain extent if hitch-hiking was socially acceptable. Need to go to a city a few hundred miles away? Head toward the highway and hitch. Give the driver a few dollars to cover gas and the inconvenience.
If hitching was socially acceptable, it wouldn't take any time at all to find a ride, we would save the environment, and maybe make new friends.
Too scared to hitch or pick someone else up? Are you too scared to ride next to someone on a bus, train, or plane? The only difference is there is a person with the responsiblity of piloting the vehicle. Smart cars could remove this responsibility.
At least, about how the DOT does ITS research in some sort of vaccuum.
The research that has been going into ITS has been happening for years, and it's been going on in the same building as the rest of the DOT agencies research projects.
I know, because I worked there.
There are a LOT of things that the US government does with respect to transportation safety and efficiency, and no one pays attention to it. The fact is, the USDOT has been doing excellent research on a lot of topics that takes the (at least US) auto manufacturers *YEARS* to adopt or evaluate. Because it's like this:
NHSTA and Federal Highway come up with very smart ideas and research. State budgets and car manufacturers fight these good ideas, tooth and nail, because they cost money.
Lee Iacocca and Chrysler didn't come up with airbags, the USDOT did, years before.
Could be put in place today. Basically it's information theory applied to mass transit systems. It's the only public transport system which promises to ammeliorate traffic congestion on the roads at a remotely reasonable cost, though it isn't going to completely replace the car. The traditional mass transit systems are massively expensive, inefficient and inconvenient in comparison.
t .org/P RT/
Read up on it:
http://www.gettherefast.org/
http://www.cpr
http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/
http://www.acprt.org/
American PRT system:
http://www.skywebexpress.com/
UK PRT system:
http://www.atsltd.co.uk/
Deleted
Damn! What a great idea.. I bet some modernized public transportation would be CHEAPER too!
Unfortunately, we'll never have a great alternative to the car. Not because people value the "freedom" of a car so much -- better public transportation != taking away your keys. It's just right now there's so much profit potential in consumption, and the government heeds lobbyists more than "planning for the future" (which some dare call communism).
I really fear for my country when gas DOES hit $5 a gallon. Everything is so spread out as to make public transport almost impossible.
The problem with a train is that you need high population desnity along that route. This isn't all that common in the US, which is sparsely populated compared to much of the world.
ITS applies to rural areas too. I work for the ITS Institute at the University of Minnesota. It's not like ITS is a new thing. It's been around for more than a decade. There is a too.
An example of rural ITS work is driver assistance technologies (like heads-up-display) for snowplows and emergency vehicles (police, ambulance). Driving across a rural farm road in a blizzard can be quite difficult. We developed a HUD system that projected an image of the road, based on DGPS location information.
I'd like to add that I'm not against trains or mass transit. Certain areas of the US can utilize trains effectively, many already do. Personally, I think trains are great for urban areas. In Minnesota, we've finally opened our first urban rail line since the street cars disappeared 50+ years ago. It has surpassed all expectations for passenger levels. Now the people who claimed it would never have been used now claim that the expectations were artifically low. It isn't just the "car lobby". There are people out there who actually fear mass transit as if it's a plot to take away their cars.
But it should be simple enough to have the sensors broadcast a signal when traffic flow drastically drops off. Hell you could have the things broadcasting constantly for a computer in cars to hear. You could instantly get a status of the next few miles and what the average speed is.
As long as each sensor is only sensitive to read the number of vehicles that pass by it and not any further data about the vehicle (make, model, color or plate number) it could give pretty much all of the benefits of the system in the article without the privacy concerns.
Vote Quimby.
Not necessarily the technological challenge. A highway is far from being a vacuum of information. It is a fairly standardised enviroment with many constraints and fairly predictable behaviour. Cars have been able since the late 90s to drive more than 90% of the time to drive amongst normal traffic.
The main reason is, companies don't want to be liable for the risk.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
It amazes me that folks who work with computers every day are so willing to trust their lives to them. It's like ther is no learning.
We already accept a huge amount of road deaths as the everyday routine. If it was really that important, we would all be using mass transit, which is much, much safer. (Having professional drivers and fewer vehicles).
I don't think that computers are up to the task yet, but they may be in a few (20?) years. Of course, they must have emergency switches and the like.
Just because they aren't ready now doesn't mean that we can't experiment with things yet. Maybe have a few lanes (seperated by concrete) that are only used for automated package delivery?
Is it wrong to drive your car simply for the enjoyment of driving?
Those of you who drive Civics and Geo Metros might not care, but what about people who own a car that's fun to drive? What if you want to take your Miata on a spirited drive on a weekend, or feel like feeling a little bit of boost in your Twin Turbo Z on an open highway? What if you wanted to hear the rumble of the V8 in your Camaro? Some of the things we do are not logical but give us enjoyment. Do you think hanging out on Slashdot when you're at work is approved by the authority figures at your job?
If the government had its way, there would be no driving for enjoyment. There would only be fuel-efficient point to point transportation. Go to work, go home, sleep, then go back to work. Increase productivity. Don't waste time on things you call "fun".
I don't want to live in a world where I have no freedom of will. I know each of these plans and laws aren't the end of the world, but they are a step in the wrong direction.
I actually work for one the state versions of these "Shadowy Government Agencies". ITS is just the monitoring of roadway conditions for the most part. They just use fairly simple techniques to record how many cars are on the road at any given point.
We're not talking about RFID chips on vehicles, we're talking about simple magnetic loops that toggle as a car drives over it. Very simple.
Some shipping trucks are tagged for fee purposes and such, but that's about it. Really you'd be blown away at how slowly traffic technology is evolving. Remember, the government is a beuracracy, they move slower than you'd believe.
Really it's the corporate world I'd be looking at, they have much better ways of tracking you, through credit cards, websites, and the like.
I hate to shatter any consipracy theories but a prototype of such a system are working with nothing more than magnets embedded in the roadway. The vehicle equipment consists of some sensors and an old Pentium based computer in the trunk. The magnets are oriented either North up or South up to represent 0s or 1s to give the computer binary information about location, etc..
See my list of good traffic map sites:
Traffic.tann.net/.
Sigalert.com.
Metrocommute.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
1986 car: http://www.argo.ce.unipr.it/ARGO/english/index.htm l :)
M.
The ARGO car M.
Those of you who drive Civics ...might not care... I hate to break this to you, but my Civic Del Sol really was a fun car to driver, and my Civic Hybrid isn't so bad either!
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Horses are quite an intelligent means of getting around. You can even ride a horse while drunk without getting cited for drunk driving. Makes a certain amount of sense too. A horse isn't going to let you go into the ditch at high speed, or allow you to wander onto a collision course with a truck.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
I remember hearing about this a couple of years ago, and it's much more involved than that.
Your car's computer would have a GPS receiver and a transponder onboard, and would constantly transmit information about your location and speed to authorities. This would enable them to do things such as give out speeding tickets when you were detected going faster than the speed limit in a certain zone.
The government's line is the typical "If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about".
Sure, you get speeding tickets now for speeding, but such as system doesn't blink and it doesn't look the other way. It'll always know what you're doing, and if you ever make a mistake or do something wrong, you'll be sure to hear about it and pay...
So.............anyone know how many roll's of tinfoil it will take to make sure that my 1991 Subaru Legacy will be invisible to "Big Brother"?
Do I need to cover the entire car? Just the windows? Should I microwave my new tires to destroy RFID tags? Dang it,I'm begining to think I'll need a tinfoil leisure suit, to go along with my tinfoil hat.
Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
The way I see it the roads are public property. Thus you should expect minimal to no amount of privacy while using those roads. You basically waver your privacy on the road by opting for travel by X where X is not in the set of {on foot} U {private, non-licenseable vehicles (ie. bicycle, skateboard, scooter, etc...)}
Whatever is hidden in your car can stay hidden in your car.... as long as its not on my or "our" property. I don't trust anyone enough to simply presume that everyone is law abiding all the time. Thus it only makes sense that I allow myself to be open to public scrutiny at all times if it ensures that everyone else is too.
Do whatever the hell "you" want to do on private property AND out of the awareness of the public... the second "you" cross the line and demand privacy when amongst "us", "we" will assume that due to human nature "you" are obviously hiding something that "we" need to know about... it either isn't legal or safe for the rest of "us"... or both.
Just remember this little quick quip when addressing the issue of privacy. "We" are more important than "you". And if you don't like that "you" are always free to leave. Though... I'm not sure there exists ANY place where "you" are more important than "them".
Uh, how many of you drive cars with a cell phone turned on? With the location based services the phone companies have, it is easy to triangulate your position, speed, and heading. Overlay a map and they know where you are. Another reason to turn off that phone and drive. I think I should build a new car, and call it the TEMPEST. Either stop emitting all of your electronic signatures, or live your life like an open book.
Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle lucid dreaming.
All that stuff you mention was not in the system I have seen, it was very low tech. They used Pentium 166s because those were the cheapest discarded computers they could find. It could communicate to nearby similarly equipped vehicles but big brother was not notified. You may be thinking of equipment that is already in use in some commercial shipping vehicles.
Slashdot is so primitive
5 3D1000%2526cid%253D28906,00.html
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/research/0,2310,sid%2
Hmm.. There's also the difference that the driver determines the destination. So unless you're jumping out of a moving car, you're going where they take you. Now bus drivers are paid to go to the right place and not to the middle of the woods to rob/rape you. Random drivers are not so motivated.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
I thought Yoda said that to Luke Skywalker... Didn't know that was originally a Spock quote...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I believe this system has already been invented in the '80s.
RTFM. The proposed intelligent roadway system can prevent most of the 42,000 deaths per year without collecting and archiving personal information and behavioral information.
The unnecessary invasion of privacy allows companies to target marketing campaigns to consumers based on their driving patters (a la Minority Report), and allows governments unprecedented surveillance and taxation into all our lives. Given that a small percentage of the general population is composed of actual crimminals, most of this surveillance is morally wrong.
I'm disappointed to see so many people raving and throwing themselves into some new and unproven technology just because it might be beneficial in some way, without fully considering the damage caused by its side effects.
You say people should consider the advantages of such a system. I agree. I also think we should consider, thoughtfully, the disadvantages of this system before stripping innocent people of their right to anonymous and free travel within their "free" country.
A train is fine if you want to go from A straight down the line to B. If however, if they don't go where you want, you want to go from A to T with 2 changes in between, you'll spend hours buggering about waiting in stations for trains to arrive.
n si t
Trains are also expensive and inefficient. They weigh at least 40 tonnes which requires significant, bloody expensive infrastructure like tunnels and bridges, they run to a schedule and this is the key, they run to a schedule whether they have any passengers or not.
During the rush hour, trains are round about *the* most efficient transport system ever devised, but that's because the are "crush loaded", a lovely term which means your face is in someone's armpit for the duration. 130% full. Outside that rush hour train efficiency sucks badly, you have 40+ tonnes which have to be accelerated and decelerated for every station down the line which seriously reduces the average speed.
The train, or "light" rail isn't the solution to the car problem. Something else is needed, something a bit like cars but which can avoid the congestion...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_tra
Deleted
People miss the point. All these laws chisel away at our freedoms. While a particular law may seem good on the surface, it's the not so obvious implications which worry me.
I see it as a game of chess- we may have a freedom such as freedom of speech guaranteed to us by the constitution, but over time governments begin to become corrupt and realize that having people speak out again them and/or overthrow them isn't in their best interest. So they write laws that don't outright ban your guaranteed rights, but they do impair them in an indirect fashion.
Cases in point are many of these laws passed after 9/11. Have you noticed that the goverment uses the threat of terrorism to scare people into accepting these laws? Laws such as the Patriot Act erode rights that we used to have. Now they just throw the possibility of "terrorism" into the charge to bypass a right you used to have, for example, "We had to break into your phone line and perform an (otherwise illegal) wiretap because we received reports of possible terrorist activities coming from this house. Sorry, we can't reveal the source of this tip because that would undermine national security"
These plans of tracking motorists just go along with the government mentality that it controls the people, instead of the people controlling it.
Let's face it. If privacy abuses are possible, they will happen.
All data is speech. All speech is Free.
Smart cars and highways coupled with charge to use fees according to both the traffic demand (e.g. rush hours) and the available facility is quite a rational goal. However, to assume these are coupled permanently with individual ownership of the vehicles need not be true.
Private ownership may become the exception not the rule it seems to be now. In some areas currently, a group of people have access rights to the same vehicle and need to schedule their use and the location of the vehicle to operate it. They pay in proportion to their use and perhaps the stress on the vehicle.
Another option could be part of a car pool where the charges are moderated by having a privately owned vehicle being charged only for a fraction of the trips made. While the "owner" may be recorded in the range of 33 - 25% of the trips, the other riders would be anonymous.
Further, it just might make more sense to live much closer to the site of one's employment or use remote methods to connect and interact when necessary.
The world that allows complete tracking would be a limited subset. Indeed as long as cash is an option transit cards would probably not be traceable to an individual. Even in the current model with an individually owned vehicle, not all roads could be economically made into a "smart" highways.
While these programs and intentions are secret now, it is not too hard to discern those pushing them. Become politically active to counter them. Become a proponent for population control, because it is the increasing demand for discrete resources that drives these programs.
I happen to think that it would be an improvement to make nearly all major roads toll roads. Moreover, the fees paid should be determined by: traffic density and available overall space. Furthermore, I am certain that the flow of traffic would be improved by computer control over individuals that <I><B>think</B></I> they multi task well. Just looking in the rear view mirror or ahead watching the knob twiddlers or cell phone distracted users computer control would be an improvement. Computer control could save property, time and lives. Moreover, the race car drivers that zoom by at 85 dodging thru multiple lanes on a curving highway only to drop to 35 upon seeing a police car are a danger to everyone.
In a crowded world with an enlarging population enamored with the automobile I think the problems are inescapable. I would prefer less of a crowd, more privacy and I would even give up my privately owned vehicle if that were the price.
I'd rather they sign and ratify the Kyoto agreement like 166 odd other states, and work on means of transportation that consume less energy and don't pollute our environment as much, because THAT'S what we really need (IMHO).
--
Try Nuggets , the mobile search engine. We answer your questions via SMS, across the UK.
Would Microsoft be allowed to program it?
We are all gonna die!!!!!
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
While they are aware of the backlash they will receive over ITS from the public, they don't really have a concrete plan on how to sell it to Joe Blow.
ITS doesn't work unless everyone on the road is participating and short of a government mandate, which they know they aren't going to get, nobody is going to spend the money to deploy it on a full scale. I believe the current thinking is that car companies will install technology like OnStar into all new vehicles and that the value of the technology(hands-free cell phone, emergency assistance, etc.) will be sufficient--they want to get a lot of mileage out of research that shows the technology increases safety--to override the privacy concerns of those who drive older vehicles, thus causing them to buy it, so it's "inevitable" that everything will magically fall into place.
So without a clear vision on how to get it deployed, most of the focus is centered on application which doesn't get them anyplace.
So really...you can be concerned about this all you want but there is nothing to see here. Vehicle count tracking is the cheapest technology we've got and it's still too expensive to deploy with any significant density on private roads and ITS involves constant individual vehicle tracking on all roads--it isn't going to happen any time soon.
It's worth pointing out that ITS is entirely driven by market droids and civil engineers--I have yet to see any information on actual technology
The amount of hardware,software,infrastructure, etc. required to implement individual, full-time tracking is staggering! Admin on this beast? HAH! Probably get talked into Windoze to run it all on. Then, on a clear day, "Blue Screen of Death" takes on a whole new meaning! ...now where's my tinfoil hat?...
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
But, most importantly, much, much, much less accidents due to careless handling and overspeeding.
Highways could have specific lanes reserved only for automated cars; eventually manual-only cars would be banned from certain higways.Cutting edge slashdot, this stuff has been around forever, the oxymoron has a national association, URL:http://www.itsa.org , I happen to chair one of its state chapters. This stuff started over 10 years ago when it was called intelligent highway vehicle systems or (IVHS), it morphed into ITS when some folks in the Federal HIGHWAY Administration realized that congress would more likely fund this if it paid lip service to other modes of transport. Over the last few years these other modes have begun to get the same level of interest or funding. For many years the transportation research board URL:http://www.trb.org thought that new road technology was concrete that set faster or lasted longer, traffic light timing or safer school bus seats. It also had an engineering constituency that reflected this. Now ITS has become a catch all for almost any software, microprocessor or sensor used in the transportation network. Just like Artificial Intelligence and other field that flatter themselves by including intelligence in their moniker, as long as its called ITS it has yet to hit the mainstream. OK so transportation engineers can use things that take advantage of Moore's law too and those funding our transportation infrastructure should invest in technology. Forget the general stuff and drill down on RFID, AVL, similiarities between traffic simulation and kinematic flow, congestion pricing, machine vision in surveillance cameras a la automatic license plate reading of every card going in and out of the city of London, etc. But a thread on ITS, please...
It might stand worth reminding everyone that this type of system is the precursor to one that would be required if flying-cars are to become commonplace. Now, whether that would be worthwhile is another debate, for another time ...
Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.
Heavy-truck reporting is one of the easiest things to implement, and many heavy trucks already report their locations automatically to a dispatching center. But there's strong industry opposition for using that info to enforce truck safety rules.
This is hilarious. Just looking at the traffic lights in my city shows that the government cannot get even the basic stop and go mechanism working properly. Anything more complicated than that will be a disaster.
When it comes to monitoring, it's completely useless. As long as one person can slip through by spraying stuff on his license plate, or by simply removing it, by using an older car, or by using back roads, or whatever, then all of the most snoopy invasive security measures are doomed to failure, and are only useful for annoying law-abiding citizens.
Terrorists/murderers/thieves will circumvent any stupid measure you dream up. Quit prying into grandma's bathroom, and quit keeping track of where I drive my car. You won't spot the guys that are actually capable of whatever it is you think I am doing. Duh.
I seriously doubt that there will ever be a system in place that works. I can think of many possible outcomes here, but I can guarentee that none of them will work... why?
:)
;) Enough said..
Has anyone actually watched the DMV (or whatever the case may be) setup traffic light timings? It's like they work for the frick'in oil companys for god sake.. burning gas is it, stop 'in go.
Something that is funny... I moved from Wisconsin to Montana back in 2001, in WI we had stop/yeild signs along with the normal traffic lights at all intersections, but in Billings, MT (largest city in the state) they DO NOT have stop/yeild signs on almost all of the side streets. (no state tax, so they cannot afford it..? doubtful)
I mean, most people when encountering a damn stop sign blow right through them. (kinda like New York City..
Now add in software that controls these systems, just imagine Microsoft getting the bid... total devistation, especially after the "auto bot" virus.
Life was hell, then I discovered Linux...
The system in my own state (Indiana) is not capable of tracking individual vehicles and is only used for detecting incidents and monitoring traffic conditions.
I always check the website before venturing onto the Borman expressway and find it to be a great help.
So there are two issues to be resolved here, and we need to take great care that these issues not be mixed up.
The first is providing fast, effective, and safe transportation for our society. New breakthroughs in technology will make possible, ultra-fast, ultra-safe, self "driving" vehicles, capable of eliminating one of the largest causes of death and injury in our society. With the use of the same technology that manages the fast and efficient flow of packets down wires, we can make tremendously better use of our road and highways. Additionally, with the advent of advanced materials and high efficiency electric motors, the cost of moving people safely at a hundred MPH or more will be dratically less both in economic cost and environmental cost, than we currently pay (as individuals or society.) We need to push for a strong mandate to improve our national infrastructure in this way. At it's highest efficiency, it should be possible to have the pleasure and ease of individual transportation with most of the benefits of mass transportation, and completely new benefits of safety and fast transit, that only advanced technology can provide.
The second issue, the bothersome issue, is the one of managing a society that respects the rights and freedom of the individual. The need for personal privacy is a truth we hold self evident. The growing impact of technology is to render our society transparent, and to cause the very real erosion of privacy. The answer is to build a body of law and social infrastructure whose singular purpose is to limit the inhumane use and/or abuse of men by other men. Have machines monitor the information, the constant recording of data, images, and sound generated by people and their activities, with the caveate, that unless a person is being charged with a felony, that the information cannot be humanly accessed, and that even in the case of such a charge, that a person has strong and enforcable rights of privacy. This allows the machinery of society to function, without having to curtail human endeavor for fear of reprisal or loss of personal privacy. Even now, we exist as entities digitally across the net, and the technology already exists to alter the internet and make each of use naked before some administrative body (see China for examples.) We don't condone such a world, because we have the rights provided a society of laws which include the basic need for privacy. We attempt to strike a balance between the need for privacy (benefit for the individual), and breach of social contracts and/or the commision of criminal acts (protection of the society.) This is never an easy struggle, and a transparent society raises the stakes of this conflict to shocking new dimensions.
However, it's only by having good men of conscience, and an active citizenry, working together responsibly, and with the goal of striking the best possible balance between these conflicting needs, that we can hope to address this challenge to our future liberty. In the end this is the only real struggle facing humanity in this new millinium. We're fast becoming our own worst enemies, and if we are to have a bright and productive future, we'll need to address the worst in ourselves, or our technology will certainly use us, in what will undoubtedly be terrible ways.
Genda
Sounds a little like: http://www.newpath4.com/interstate81.htm ; a system I projected 8+ MONTHS AGO... a lightweight upper roadway *quickly assembled* that only carries economy sized cars and motorcycles... separates trucks from small traffic. Doubles traffic capacity for interstates. An automated system using robotic pneumatic arms could set the "pre-fab" sections in place, totally eliminate any need to widen interstate highways saving many millions. Riley http://www.newpath4.com/ . BTW, for those of you good Readers who have been trying to keep pace with my inventions, yesterday I figured out how to get 1,000 MPG from Gasoline... maybe more than that. I won't be writing it on a webpage tho. There isn't any reason to now that I've fixed the LN2000 to use a steam-nitrogen combination for free. (That is on my website.)
The brilliant German government, in the light of insurmountable unemployment decided to use just such a black-box system to collect motorway toll for heavy trucks. In yet another brilliant move, they bought the system from the only company offering it - a company formed by several major technology and automotive firms who had, independent of each other, developed just the kind of system described in the article. Well, pretty much, it was more focused on heavy trucks, monitoring them for logistical stuff, whatever. Only problem was, no trucking companies were interested. Hence, they combined their systems (or rather, rigged together with string and sheer power of will) and sold it to the government for toll collecting. The result: More than a year after the system was supposed to go into full operation they finally got the beta running, more or less. Constantly announcing fixed days for going operational and then failing again, this has been the biggest embarrassment to the entire German technology sector since......well, pretty much ever. How will the US version look?
I used to use them all the time when I lived in a town that had them. They just went where you expected them to go without you having to steer them, fill them up with petrol, or get a license to use them.
And the best thing is, you can legally and safely use them while drunk!
alot of car guys are allready worried about the gps system in cars being linked to the ecu in obdIII, which has been rumored about for years. my car does not comply with federal, state, or local standards for emissions or safety, and i like it that way, hell i did it on purpose. i feel that the seat belt law is a violation of my right to be an idiot. we have feared for quite sometime now that whith obdIII we might oneday get a notice from uncle sam telling us to fix our catalylic comverter fixed, efter the ecu phoned home and told them that i have a 3 inch downpipe running to a glasspack and a turndown now. I do not like the idea of my car being a snitch. this is where we out think the car. When we tune a modern fuel injected car we have two basic options a piggy back that takes airflow signals from the sensors then lies to the ecu and tells it a different reading causing it to add more fuel, or a stand alone which replaces the ecu and just does whatever i have programmed it to do without lies. The gorvernment says that we cant use a stand alone but i dont listen to them when it comes to my car anyway.
Honestly ask yourself if you want to loose the thrill of taking a corner, of using a fast heal/toe, fealing a hard launch, or doing 150+. I push my car, i squeeze every bit of power out of it i can, i drive it on the edge of control, but i know both my own and the cars limitations. i have passed on the inside of a tight corner at twice the posted speed while every one else is slowing down, but only because i knew the car could do it. The government does not know how to drive and neither does most of the public that is why when i had to take a ddc i was angered that they were misinforming people of what to do in situations such as skids and spins. i know that if i start to slide out i point the car where i want to go and hammer it and it will pull out, but that isnt what they told me. The only benifit of this system is that bad drivers wont drive, but i would rather make it harder to get a liscence then to let some one else do the thinking for me.
In the end i know that you wont listen to me because allot of the guys on here are liberal weenies who think Ralph Nader is cool and that eviromentalism isnt selfish. However Unsafe at Any Speed was complete bullshit, yes the Corvair had problems but it was the fact that a mid engine rear drive car handles completely differently from a front engine rear drive car that killed people, and if you want the best solution for saving the planet clear cut the rain forest and pump as much poison gas into the air as we can, then we all die and the fucking earth can start again. I have every right to pull the airbags out of my car, cut out the sheet metal, use plasic windows, run slicks on the street, or used n2o without a dumptube. I do these things because i can control it, i know how every thing will react, i have something a computer doesnt..... skill.
Too much overhead and planning required to set up a database.
Sounds like a fantastic idea, until a bunch of high-schoolers drive by with baseball bats or someone driving a two-lane wide SUV takes them out.