Slashdot Mirror


D.C. Commuters to be Scanned With Infrared Cameras

owlgorithm writes "Washington, D.C. area commuters are going to be "scanned like groceries at the supermarket" in order to catch single-occupant vehicles who are illegally using carpool lanes. The article, from the Washington Post, says that infrared cameras capable of detecting human skin will be installed, rather than the visible-spectrum cameras in use today. So much for using dummies in the front seat."

10 of 452 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Solution to Privacy Concerns by KillerCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1 - ...Discard other data.

    They won't.

    2 - ...open to public scrutiny.

    It won't.

    3 - ...don't even get recorded to a hard drive at any point.

    It will.

    The problem with this stuff is that there is a constant erosion or privacy. Every step is just one more little thing. What's the big deal about "a" when they are already doing b,c,d,e, and f. And once "a" is gone, you never get it back because the people already accepted giving it up. When people say "we don't have to worry about losing x because people would never accept it" ... well ... I don't think that the forefathers ever thought that people would give up habius corpus, or require national IDs to get into federal parks.
  2. Re:I envision... by Cecil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Human beings have a rather unique IR signature that is very easily distinguishable from other heat sources.

    Human beings also have a rather unique ability to find creative ways to beat challenges like that.

  3. No more HOV by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    HOV lanes are fairly pointless as is. It's clear that people are not significantly incentivized to use the carpool lanes. Moreover, conflicting schedules (particularly after work) and the impossibility of spontaneity provide heavy disincentives toward their use. They certainly don't cut down on pollution or fuel consumption as cars spend more time stuck in traffic in the adjacent lanes, or taking longer, more circuitous routes. They don't cut down on traffic, as more cars are forced to fit in fewer lanes. People who live in Arlington or Falls Church, especially, could have to go miles out of the way to get to work, despite having a major traffic artery in their back yards.

    The money spent on policing, enforcement, and, in some cases, construction and maintenance of elaborate switching mechanisms to change the direction of traffic in center lanes, could be more efficiently spent toward carbon offsets, and opening the lanes themselves to normal traffic would better accomplish the goal of reducing congestion. Or make the Metro train free to ride; it's already heavily subsidized anyway, and everyone would benefit from increased use. (Of course, capacity would likely need to be increased as well, since they're heavily used already).

    Regulating the routes of traffic in an effort to decrease traffic is an exercise in futility. It merely relocates the problem; it does nothing to alleviate it. Traffic is already self-regulating, especially as the distribution of information becomes increasingly streamlined. When one route slows down, people take alternate routes. If the distribution is inequitable, it's because of poor infrastructure design in relation to the population. The cure is redesign, not banishing the overwhelming majority of vehicles from the shortest route between Point A and Point B. It would be one thing if HOV was a stopgap while more effective measures were implemented, but as it stands, it's merely contributing to the problem it claims to resolve.

  4. More seriously, that's not what HOV lanes are for. by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, yes, I know, they don't really specify... ...but hopefully you realize the idea and spirit of HOV lanes is for carpool, multiple passenger commuter, busses, passenger vans, and similar applications, and not someone who happens to be toting a child in an infant seat. :-/

    (How did the parent get modded "Insightful"?)

  5. Re:More seriously, that's not what HOV lanes are f by techno-vampire · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you saying, then, that a parent and child don't qualify for "two or more people" in the car? When did minors stop being people?

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  6. Re:Big Brother by heinousjay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As someone who has commuted in DC, I welcome this. Nothing chapped my ass more than watching a douche take the HOV all on his lonesome. He didn't earn it, he can sit in shit with the rest of us.

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  7. Definitely not a new violation of rights by adatepej · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're just automating an inspection that could have been performed by cops on the ground. I know because I got a ticket for driving in the stupid carpool lane once. And you're already in public in a vehicle where you're, at most, shielded from plain view by a bit of glass. Which is to say you're not shielded from plain view.

    So, unless law enforcement plans to use this technology to see something it's not already capable of seeing, e.g. using it to see through the walls of your home, I don't think this is a big deal.

    1. Re:Definitely not a new violation of rights by parcel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're just automating an inspection that could have been performed by cops on the ground That's what bothers me more than the privacy aspect of this... the automated law enforcement. Same deal with the red light cameras they put up all over the area (at least, Loudoun and Fairfax counties)... A friend of mine got an automated ticket for being 0.1 seconds under the red. And we have some short yellows, that are difficult to stop for in good conditions. If it was raining, you could easily end up fishtailing into an intersection trying to stop for the silly things.

      I've been in a lot of squealing-tires, near-accidents to avoid these cameras in situations that, were the enforcement done by a human being who could apply rational judgement, would be ignored (barring cops on a power trip - and most here seem to be good, rational people).

      So, that's exactly what scares me... this general migration towards automated law enforcement.
  8. So many suggsted avoidance schemes, but... by clickety6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So many suggested avoidance schemes, but haven't any of you actually thought that maybe you could just car pool instead? Easy solution and so much better for the environment. Plus you might actually get some stimulating conversation on the way rather than the inane radio DJ chatter ;-)

    --
    ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
  9. Washington DC by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's clear that people are not significantly incentivized to use the carpool lanes. Not true at all in the DC area. There are several rideshare organizations and slug lots to accommodate those who want to use the carpool lanes.

    Moreover, conflicting schedules (particularly after work) and the impossibility of spontaneity provide heavy disincentives toward their use. That's why you ave slug lots. People line up in those lots and motorists pick people up from the lines. It doesn't matter if your schedule conflicts with your carpool buddies, because your buddies will be different on the way home.

    People who live in Arlington or Falls Church, especially, could have to go miles out of the way to get to work, despite having a major traffic artery in their back yards. Jumpin' Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick. Please don't tell me you consider I-66 to be a "major traffic artery". Because of Arlington's pigheadedness, Route 50 has more travel lanes through Arlington than Interstate 66.

    And anyway, Falls Churchians and Arlingtonians have plenty of roads other than 66 to choose from. Hell, you can't even get onto 66 going Eastbound from half of Arlington, anyhow.

    more efficiently spent toward carbon offsets I've never understood this whole carbon offsets thing. Is there any actual legal framework with teeth in place to force emitters to purchase "carbon credits"?

    Even if there was such a thing, I would be against it for this purpose. Why should we prefer to spend our "carbon emition" resources on ParkingLot-66 as opposed to actual production of useful goods? To me, that seems wasteful.

    Or make the Metro train free to ride; it's already heavily subsidized anyway, and everyone would benefit from increased use. DC Metro is already at capacity. You seem to be familiar with Northern VA, so you've probably heard the term "Orange Crush". The Blue line is at capacity as well.

    There really isn't much more that Metro can do to increase capacity. They're already running many 8 car trains. What metro really needs to do, that they will never do, is add more tracks. Currently, if there is one "sick passenger" on one train in one direction, the entire metro system gets brought to its knees. This is because that line will have to single-track (trains going in both directions on one track), and the resulting slowdown gums up the other lines as well.

    At any rate, I disagree with your assertion that HOV won't change behavior. I know plenty of people who HOV when they otherwise would not. Slug lines further support this position.

    What I think may screw the whole thing up is these HOT lanes. I mean, really. People in NoVA have way more money than time. Why should I bother to pick up slugs if I can just pay $5 or whatever and not even have to slow down?
    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock