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.
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.
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>
The critical thing to keep track of is not the realtime data collection, but how much of a storage capability this system would have. Afterall, keeping data on everybody's movements for years would be a ton of data, most of which being useless....
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.
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.
I think the solution is very simple. Don't give control of a private vehicle to a public system. Provide a quality system of public vehicles. I wouldn't mind losing privacy or having to face more restrictions on driving myself if public transportation was anywhere near as feasible of an option so that I didn't have to drive myself. Unfortunately, the auto industry has undermined public transportation anywhere it thought it could get away with it, and got a slap on the wrist even when it thought wrong.
...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~
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.
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.
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.