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.
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>
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.
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
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.
...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~
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
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.
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.
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.
That's got to be one of the most paranoid articles I have read in a while. I work for my state Department of Transportation in the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) division. And yes, there is a national architecture. Virtually every state has a state or regional architecture based on the national architecture. And while there may be those who have thought of the "snooping" potential, that certainly isn't the goal. You claim there is no public pressure for it. Well, there is a constant stream of complaints about the traffic conditions and weaknesses in the transportation system. ITS is an attemt to improve that and respond to the growing demand to improve our nation's roadways. The use of ITS technologies has a significant impact on increasing the capacity of existing roads, and reducing accidents. Hundreds of thousands of dollars, and dozens of lives are saved annually through the use of technology on the roadways in my city alone. Not to mention the reduction in polution and saving travelers like yourself time by keeping the traffic flowing. This isn't some clandestine attempt by the government to find out whether you've had your windshield repaired lately. Extreme care is taken to ensure that these systems are not used to identify and monitor individuals. Let's face it: technology is becoming an increasingly central part of our lives. It isn't going away. Let's not fight it. But let's work together to ensure that it is used responsibly and effectively.
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
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"
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.
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).
Extreme care is taken to ensure that these systems are not used to identify and monitor individuals.
This is that part that the article's author was complaining about, and is something that is unavoidable. Consider for a moment how such a system will have to work, if it will track individual vehicles. Is it going to be tied to a license plate number? If so, it's trivial to trace it back to a specific person. Just a unique random id? Still not a problem, if you look at more than a few days worth of data on a particular vehicle, it would be very easy to come up with it's home, which gives you an address, and that links you back to a person. The only way that this can possibly not invade a person's privacy, is by not tracking individual vehicles, and I will bet that is not going to happen.
Now, this isn't to say that tracking individuals is all bad. As long as there is very strenious judicial oversight, and very, very, very (yes, I wrote that three times on purpose, let me add one more for emphasis), very harsh penalties for a breach of trust, it might actually do what it's being advertised for, without the privacy problem. Unfortunatly, considering that several large coporations seem to be hot on this idea, you can bet that the data is going to be available to too many people to actually prevent privacy intrusions.
Before I would ever allow this type of system to be in a car I own, I would need a lot of stuff to reassure me that it is more than just another way for the government and industry to invade my privacy.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
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.