Slashdot Mirror
UK To Passively Monitor Every Vehicle
DrSkwid writes "The UK Police are building a network to monitor the movement of every vehicle in the U.K. through an extensive Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system. The data will be retained for 2 years. The Register further reports that the system will likely be used for issuing speeding fines." From the article: "The primary aims claimed for the system are tackling untaxed and uninsured vehicles, stolen cars and the considerably broader one of 'denying criminals the use of the roads.' But unless the Times has got the spacing wrong, having one every quarter of a mile on motorways quite clearly means they'll be used to enforce speed limits as well, which would effectively make the current generation of Gatsos obsolete. Otherwise, checking a vehicle's tax and insurance status every 15 seconds or thereabouts would seem overkill."
I'd just like to say thanks for trying to waste my hard-earned tax money on this, rather than going out and using it for something useful like fixing the sorry state of our education system or making the NHS ever so slightly less pathetic.
this could be a very interesting tool. Other than it's privacy issues of course, it could be used in some neat ways.
Let's say you have a criminal who has been busted for drug charges. You could then find out where he's been, and probably track down where he gets his stuff from, and take it straight up the channels to the big guys.
Or does it not work that way?
One group of people asking why the English let their government run roughshod over them, and a group of Brits claiming that they fully understand the reasons behind the measures their government is taking and are willing to endure scrutiny for the public good.
1984 wasn't set in America.
Ok, never mind.
I just hope that the US doesn't adopt this idea.
I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
>
> Or you could do what we did, have a revolution!
> The UK Gov't hasn't given us a whole heck of a lot of trouble since...
Ah yes, flee UK ID cards and 90-day detention without trial for the balmy shores of the United States, with REAL ID, and, umm... indefini... aaw fuck.
As the gray of November gives way to a long cold winter for Western Civilization, the UK's forgotten stepchild (Canada, eh?) is beginning to look warm and sunny by comparison.
I've always felt that these sorts of measures are alot better than the speed enforment that we have in Australia and many other places - The hidden multinova cameras that police now use here.
If you really want to stop speeding, this is the way to do it. All the time. Everywhere.
If it sounds radical, well at least it will mean that in the long run the speed limits themselves will have to be adjusted to something that is reasonable, rather than what has happened in most countries - speed limits that were set but which are only enforced a very tiny fraction of the time.
Also, getting done for doing too fast an average speed is far more important than getting unlucky for doing an instantaneous speed that is too fast at some random point in your trip. Almost everyone speeds a little at some time - unless you only use cruise control to drive with you will always run the risk of going too fast at some point when you aren't looking at your speedo. (And, its not exactly safe to drive the whole trip whilst looking only at your speed)
As for the privacy issues.
Well, I think its a little too late for anyone in the UK (maybe anywhere, really) to get worried about that. Look at the congestion tax in the UK (Automatic licence plate recognition). Look also at the ability to obtain a list of every base station that your mobile is associated with - the phone companies can do this if requested by a magistrate, although that usually only done in murder cases or similar. Look at the number of CCTV's that proliferate in every public place.
Unfortunatly, the invasion into our privacy has only just begun. There is no techonlogical way to avoid this - it will only get worse. Soon enough automatic facial recognition will be connected to all the CCTV's around and you will be trackable just for being visible. You can identify people by the way that they walk. Some systems now can identify potential suicides in the happening in train stations by the typical behaviour people make prior to jumping in front of trains.
The only solution to the privacy issues are legislative ones. You can't stop this level of data collection anymore, all we can do is ensure that only certain legitimate uses for it exist. This is the only way that any of us will have real protection in the future - if its in a constitution or in legislation.
Just my 2c worth,
Michael
There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
Every Western country is facing Big Brother issues. However, I wonder if the UK has created its own issue here: whether it is wise or moral to criminalize huge numbers of the population with the aim of raising extra revenue for the government. Few in the UK would argue that the present system of speed cameras (they are called Gatso cameras) is designed for much else other than making money for the state.
I guess if a government goes about giving very large numbers of otherwise law-abiding citizens a criminal record they should not expect much more than cynicism when it comes to other social problems. We are then all the losers.
A by-product of the current obsession with safety is that enormous sums have to be spent on repairing emergency vehicles whose suspension is wrecked going over speed bumps in urban areas. In addition, more acute cases die because it takes longer for an ambulance to get them to hospital and the ride there is bumpy to say the least. It might even turn out that the safety obsession kills more people than it is intended to save.
Meanwhile, new licensing laws in the UK permitting the sale of alcohol 24/7 promise many mores deaths from alcohol abuse and its fallout. Liver disease from alcohol abuse among those under 30 is several hundred per cent higher than it was even twenty years ago. Apparently it's OK to drink yourself to death in the UK, but woe betide you if you get in an automobile stone cold sober.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
The romans posed the question "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?"
I would be in favor of a system to track the movements of all cars and issue speeding violations as long as the data is a matter of public record and it can be proven (for example, via Freedom of Information requests) that all traffic regulations are being strictly enforce on all public officials, including elected official, appointed official, off duty police and their families, friends, and relatives, and anybody else in a position of influence.
If a speed limit is too low, I'm sure it would get rapidly fixed if there were 100% enforcement of fines and penalties against senators and representatives.
If a speed limit is, in fact, valid and legitimate for safety reasons then 100% enforcement is certainly a good thing.
The problem occurs when traffic regulations are constructed in such a way that everybody violates them because they are unreasonable and the police use them as a means of selectively grabbing people they have an illegitimate beef against.
I'm feeling sad that these kind of measures can be introduced in the UK and the citizens of the UK doesn't feel the need to throw those responsible for this surveilance into the ocean or something.
...
Seriously, why is it, that we have to live in such a passive society? Like if it would have been bred for obedience.
First, there were cameras on the streets and noone said a word
Then, there were monitoring of cars and noone said a word
Finally, when I got stripped from all my freedoms, labeled a criminal, then, there was noone to say a word.
Sad.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
I don't normally like to resort to ad hominem attacks, but you are a moron for believing this.
There are so many problems with government organizations having this level of control over their citizenry. Starting with the people actually doing the control, who do they get to monitor these systems? What if it's some creepy guy trying to stalk women with this technology? What if it's someone trying to use knowledge of your actions to blackmail you? If I'm working the camera, and I see you walking down the street holding hands with one woman, then the next day another woman, I could demand that you pay me money or I'll let them know about each other, etc. This is one example but you can see many more. What if I'm not even working for the government, but I hack the system to gain access to this kind of information?
At a higher level, what's legal and what's not is always subject to change. You could be subject to hundreds of dollars in fines every day just for doing something that otherwise seems ordinary. See the above comment about the man asking a drug offender for directions. Nothing illegal took place, but in the investigation of the drug offender, while trying to find his customers and sources, you would get flagged for investigation and would be subject to search and arrest. Just getting arrested is often enough for you to lose your job and be embarassed by your friends, colleagues and family.
I can go on, but I hope that you see why your line of thinking that this is "only bad for bad people" is flawed.
So how about we put cameras in every home, in order to detect criminal activities?
You've got nothing to hide, so it's all fine and dandy, right? After all, why watch you? You're just doing your average activities, right?
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
I think that this will probably cost them money.
If you know that you will be "caught" and have to pay everytime you speed, you probably won't do it if you really don't have to.
So my guess is that they will spend a lot of money to install such a system and afterwards will lose lots of money because of less people speeding.
I think it is more likely that the system will be used to create a giant toll system.
However, I agree that these cameras have bad implications for civil liberties -- and far beyond just traffic offenses. Once they're tracking you, they can be monitoring to see if you're engaging in any "terrorist-like" behavior, such as planning protests against an opressive government.
Of course, this just makes me glad I don't live in Airstrip One.
By the way, even if speeding were a problem, in this case the "solution" is worse.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Thanks to the USA-PATRIOT act, I might be one of the 30,000+ US citizens with no links to terrorism who was a subject of a national security letter. I'll never know, because of the gag order that accompanies them. My (9th amendment) right to know, as previously guaranteed by the FOIA act and other laws, has been nullified.
My right to petition the government for grievances and to peaceably assemble is violated every time I'm herded into a "free speech zone".
My right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures disappears the moment I get in to a motor vehicle, whether I'm driving it or not.
My property can be taken without just compensation any time the government feels that someone else would pay more tax if they had it instead of me.
That's just what I can think of at 11:30 at night after a couple of stiff drinks. I'm sure I can come up with some more.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Don't know about UK, but in DK about 1 in 5 casualties of traffic is thought to be caused speeding. Those are the official numbers. I would imagine that the numbers are not so different in UK.
Of course, such numbers comes with the usual reservations. No one knows if the casualty would have been suffered if the speeder had not, in fact, speeded.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
I am a professional driver, and see this every day. The motorways are full of people who are too scared to use the outside lane when neccessary, but who drive in the centre lane almost obsessively. Consequently, when they come up behind a slower moving vehicle in the centre lane, they brake, causing following traffic to either, brake hard themselves, or, swerve into the outside lane, regardless of the traffic situation. This is what causes pile-ups. I drive for miles on virtually empty motorways sometimes and there are still lines of cars in the centre lane, usually only 20 or 30 feet behind each other. There is another problem with this - when I have to overtake a vehicle in the left hand lane, I have to 'break into' this line of cars somehow. This is difficult when they are only 20 feet apart, so I have to pull out much sooner, and stake my claim before they pull alongside.
I could go on for hours about the bad things that are happening on the roads, but speeding is the least of my worries. My truck has a tachograph, so anytime the police wants to stop me, they can tell instantly whether I've been speeding or not. Why should the car drivers be exempt from this ? Bad driving is the real issue, and nothing much is being done about it. I am fed up with seeing females negotiating junctions with their right hand holding a phone to their left ear and their left hand on the right hand side of the steering wheel. Sometimes the right hand has a piece of food in it as well ! No-one can argue that that behaviour is safe, either for them or others.
In the end, there are too many cars on the road, driven by very basically qualified people. No one forced them into this situation. The free market sold these people cars and the idea of freedom, so they can't really complain that they need a car to get to work, the shops, whatever. It's down to their buying habits that turned villages into dormitories for workers who have to drive 50 miles to work everyday. Either people find alternative ways to work (internet based etc) or live closer to the place of employment.
How long can the country as a whole be held to ransom by the car ? The government can't ban cars outright, but they can make it as difficult (read expensive) as possible to own and operate one.
As a disclaimer, I must add that I ride a GSX1100 suzuki, and so speeding is a virtual certainty, but even then, it is so much harder to find adequate space in which to do so, because of the unpredictability of the other traffic. But as a motorcyclist, I know with painful certainty what a mistake at speed will mean. I have in the past fallen off and hit the road at over 60 mph, and it's not fun believe me. So, hands up all those car drivers who have intimate knowledge of the surface of the road. Apart from motorcyclists / cyclists, there aren't any hands showing. This is where it has gone wrong. Every driver should be aware of the road surface in front of them, the temperature, how wet the road is, what white lines feel like as you go over them. That's where true control comes from, being aware of your surroundings.
Instead, they have the heating up high, the sound turned up, and sit in the middle lane eating and talking on their phones, and hope that no-one gets in their way until they get to work.
I for one won't miss their departure from the environment, and sad to say, they deserve everything they get in the mean time.