Technology as Tattletale

The New York Times is carrying an article noting the increasing presence of location-sensing technologies in our lives. It discusses several applications of the technology like tracking stolen cash from a bank, or making sure a teenage son follows the rules. The article also notes that these ultra-high resolution GPS trackers can allow freedom as much as restrict it: "Project Lifesaver, a nonprofit group in Chesapeake, Va., fits Alzheimer's patients and autistic children with radio frequency beacons disguised as bracelets, which help emergency responders find them if they are lost. Next spring the group will introduce new bracelets, created by Locator Systems, a British Columbia company, that combine radio signals with G.P.S. and cellular communications. That should allow caregivers to establish a zone where patients can safely wander, said Jim McIntosh, the company's chief executive. If patients wander off, emergency crews could receive more specific information."

Comments

"As much" is the key phrase

[Anonymous Coward]

"The article also notes that these ultra-high resolution GPS trackers can allow freedom as much as restrict it:"

I have a feeling that the helping of a couple of autistic children is not going to offset the massive use by 'nannies.' Saying that it can allow freedom *as much* as restricting it is only trying to put a good face on a device that has massive civil liberty concerns.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[CRCulver]

Saying that it can allow freedom *as much* as restricting it is only trying to put a good face on a device that has massive civil liberty concerns.

Since when do minors have a right to go somewhere their parent or guardian wishes them not to? I think this device has massive child-raising concerns, but your suggestion that parents cannot keep track of their children--whom they are ultimately responsible for--is silly.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[DaedalusHKX]

Wow, man, just wow. According to you, I should have been dead, as should all my extended family. Not only were we NOT chipped and tagged like cattle, but we grew up spending quite a bit of time on the streets (videogames weren't available where I grew up, until I was about 10). Amazing, and you're saying that without the EOG (eye of god) mechanism, a child cannot be expected to be responsible?

No wonder you people need lords and masters to tell you when to breathe.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[CRCulver]

I never claimed that this technology is necessary or good, I was just contesting the OPs assertion that civil liberties are involved here.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[DaedalusHKX]

Think on it like this. When a whole generation grows up tagged like cattle, always submitting to the cops, never having shot or carried a gun or trained in any form of hand to hand combat (call it martial arts, call it PT, call it what you will), and never having exercised their own rights (which are now presumed "granted by government" anyways) what more do you need to enslave them?

The fence is like that which a dog learns of early in life inside the electric fence. Walk too far and BZZT. Eventually even if the power dies, that dog will NEVER test the limits again (unless he's one of those rare individuals that resist submission at all costs (dominant/alpha)).

I don't see this as being that useful, other than as a way to keep the cattle of mankind in line and teach them that "someone's always watching"... the great "eye in the sky" and all.

The upside is that there will be plenty who will exercise their freedom, and circumvent these technologies, and eventually leave this planet to the meek/cattle-people to live on. It is the only logical outcome. You cannot "save the world" because it includes the bovine-men alongside those who will not be cowed, and the bovines refuse to be saved... better to be hamburger for sure than to contest with the wild beasts for survival on the range. The only solution is to leave (if anyone suggests crushing the bovine-people in a genocidal armageddon, while fun to entertain in Quake 4 Enemy Territory, in real life, such an endeavor is doomed to fail, and in the unlikely event of success, the drain on the psyche would leave the victors in worse shape than the now nonexistent losers). And I would not be too surprised if the exodus I'm suggesting, has happened at least once before in the history of mankind.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[houghi]

Not a right as such. But that does not mean that they not should be able to do so. How do you learn trust if you do not trust them.

I knew a girl that was watched all the time by her parents. ALL THE TIME. She was not allowed to go anywhere. That was untill she was 18. Then she was out on her own. Having had no experience of what bounderies should be, she became the school slut in a matter of weeks.

And being the school slut only harms her. Having a whole generation of kids that have not learned what trust and bounderies are will result in a desaster on a much greater scale.

I agree, we should think of the children, but as them being the future, not little people that stay children all the time.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[n dot l]

I was just about to reply with pretty much exactly what you wrote, only I wouldn't have expressed it nearly as well as you did. If I had mod points and hadn't already posted, I'd throw another +1 Insightful onto your post.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[Charcharodon]

I put one of those on my dog because he like to go say hi to everyone in the neighboorhood. For a bout a week he refused to move out of the middle of the yard since he was so scared of the fence. That was until he figured out where the control box was and chewed it up, turning the fence off. I'm not saying he was smart enough to figure that out, he just managed to chew up the right thing, but he certaining didn't stay in the yard once he figured out the power was gone.

Nothing in life is an absolute or even remotely permanent. People can get used to all kinds of restrictions, but that doesn't mean that they'll stay that way for very long once the restrictions are lifted. Take a look at any riot or natural distaster for very recent examples.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[Thrip]

You know, if you're trying to make a reasonable argument, you should try not to lose all your credibility by suggesting that going to live somewhere on a different planet is "the only logical outcome." Just so you know, it's not even a remote possibility. You can gaze up at the sky all day, but come nightfall, you'll be herded back into the barn like the rest of us. Some of us ARE planning a stampede, and your escapist stargazing is not helping.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[FooAtWFU]

He wrote:

I think this device has massive child-raising concerns, but your suggestion that parents cannot keep track of their children--whom they are ultimately responsible for--is silly. You wrote:

Wow, man, just wow. According to you, I should have been dead, as should all my extended family. Now, as a random Slashdotter who just stumbled into TFCommentPage, I must say that this is a very impressive non sequitor. (And there's a lot of other stuff I could say about the exchange, but I'll refrain.)

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[Registered Coward v2]

have a feeling that the helping of a couple of autistic children is not going to offset the massive use by 'nannies.' Saying that it can allow freedom *as much* as restricting it is only trying to put a good face on a device that has massive civil liberty concerns.

Unless it is used by government for tracking purposes your massive civil liberty concerns simply do not exist.

Private individuals have the right to decide how they want to employee such a device; and I would agree there are privacy concerns if companies wanted to use that to keep track of employees outside of the bounds of employment.

However, in general, the monitoring of minor children by their parents or legal guardians; or of patients by care facilities, is a reasonable use of the device.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[cumin]

You couldn't have made a better argument for tracking your children. You absolutely must look after their safety, but if you can't know where they are once out of the house, then you can't let them out of the house. On the other hand, if you sit them down and say you can leave the house, you can do whatever, but I have to be able to find you, then you can give them freedom that you couldn't have before.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Look at some of the freakiest chicks in porn, most of them have very religious families. I.. have a friend who knows of at least 3 superfreaks who were raised as proper Mormon girls.

Hell, look at some of the most messed up people you personally know, most of them will also come from very religious backgrounds.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[EtoilePB]

You absolutely must look after their safety, but if you can't know where they are once out of the house, then you can't let them out of the house. On the other hand, if you sit them down and say you can leave the house, you can do whatever, but I have to be able to find you, then you can give them freedom that you couldn't have before.

And what about all of the generations that grew up before tracking? I was 21 before I or anyone I knew had cell phones. And even then I just had one because I was driving a 14-year-old P.O.S. car with 114,000 miles on it back and forth across the state, by myself (at night. Often).

For every child born before, oh, 1980 or 1985, we did things like saying, "I'm going to ride my bike to Jenny's house," and our parents would say things like, "be home by dinner, we're eating at 5:30." In 2007 that looks inexplicably naive and irresponsible, but how many generations were raised that way?

Our parents knew where we were because there was a bond of trust and we were expected to tell the truth. And being discovered to be lying, yes, cost us the freedom to go out of the house. ("Grounded for TWO WEEKS?! But moooooooom!")

I seem to have turned out to be a responsible, trustworthy, competent adult, and so do my friends and co-workers and peers. Sure, there are jerks and idiots and people who will sleep with anything with a pulse, but that's always true. In any generation. And the experiences where I pushed boundaries and sometimes got caught seem, in the long run, to have been more memorable for me.

I have many, many things for which to thank my parents, but I think the one I'm most grateful for is that they allowed me to make many small mistakes, so that as I grew up I'd have learned and internalized, on my own, not to make the big ones.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[cumin]

You assume that your parents would have restricted your freedom more if they'd been able to?

I think not, I think your parents would have treated you pretty much the way they did and you would have become pretty much the person you are. Ditto for me. Those previous generations, I think *most* but certainly not all of them got the same freedoms our parents tried to give us. But that's not the group of parents and kids this would make much difference for. I can think of a group of kids that were pretty much grounded until they moved out. Those are the kids that needed some help, but the only way to help them would have been to make their mom feel more secure. I expect you can think of those kids in your experience too, and if you think back you'll realize the only way they could have gotten more freedom was by changing what their parents would allow them to do. I really can't seem much way to accomplish that with any technology that doesn't do something like this. Sure, better to make good parents than good technology, just let me know how that works out for you.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[Anonymous Coward]

"Look at some of the freakiest chicks in porn, most of them have very religious families."

Er, can you proved a link plz? Just to, um, be sure you aren't feeding us BS here.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess, you have no kids.

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Google "Belladonna."

Re:"As much" is the key phrase

[DaedalusHKX]

You know, as much as I think your idea is good, stampedes are the reason Remington sells .44 Remington Magnum Wadcutter ammo... to crack the heads of the lead beasts. The rest, as you said, get herded quietly. This has been the direct outcome of every slave revolt since Spartacus (lest you forget, he LOST, and a LOT of weaker men were crucified along both sides of a LONG road, all courtesy of our "civilized" Western Roman Empire, the CRADLE of the fine and civilized Catholic/Christian Religion and of the marvel of Western "Civilization".

You'd do well to think on that carefully.

Please, do not feel that I'm discouraging your stampede. As far as I'm concerned, do what you THINK or FEEL is right.

Do what you feel is right, I won't argue your decision... but if you do it, make sure you WIN... it would be the second SEMI-SUCCESSFUL slave revolt in history, and if you keep what you WIN (freedom) it will be the first FULLY successful one. The last semi-successful one was in 1776, and they only managed to keep that hard won freedom until 1791, when the cattle consented to have a new fence built, to "enable interstate trade" or some such excuse, when the only REAL purpose was... indeed, to BUILT A NEW PEN for the bovine-men.

When necessity is argued, look closely at what is being proposed.

"Necessity is the creed of slaves, it is the argument of tyrants."

As for getting out into space, I can guarantee that if the government STAYS OUT OF IT (highly unlikely), the private sector would probably solve the problem in 10 years tops, and more likely in 5 or so. Private individuals have DRIVEN innovation and discovery, whether the concept of BSD, or that of Linux (it was a private endeavor by Linus Torvalds that started it, and those that undertook projects did it mostly to satisfy egos, needs or desires) or AC electricity distribution/generation (Nikola Tesla), or Diesel engines (Rudolf Diesel), or Gas engines or whatever invention have you, its all been the result of private endeavors. Monolithic/Institutionalized government has only been a roadblock to actual progress, generally adapting all inventions to maintain its own existence and blocking advances that would've dissipated the great struggle for resources that justifies the very existence of monolithic institutionalized government... generally at great cost to its peons... ahem slaves... ahem... "citizens".

Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[mastershake_phd]

In a few years its going to be a lot harder for kids to get away with stuff. No more jumping out your bedroom window, etc. Get ready for a generation of sheltered kids. We can call them Generation S, or maybe Generation P.

Generation S & Generation P - Copyright mastershake_phd 2007

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[n dot l]

Meh. By then parents will be so busy doing their own stuff and generally neglecting their children that there won't be anyone to watch the monitors, so it all cancels out in the end.

Oh, wait, that already happened, you say?

Well then by all means tag the little bastards. And someone make me a device that yells "Get off my lawn!" whenever kids get close...I'm far too busy doing my own stuff and neglecting real life to be bothered...

</rant>

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[mastershake_phd]

Meh. By then parents will be so busy doing their own stuff and generally neglecting their children that there won't be anyone to watch the monitors, so it all cancels out in the end.

Oh, wait, that already happened, you say?

Well then by all means tag the little bastards. And someone make me a device that yells "Get off my lawn!" whenever kids get close...I'm far too busy doing my own stuff and neglecting real life to be bothered...

A friend of mine has kids, hes in his mid 20s. We were talking about censorship and he said TV should be censored because his kids watch it. Use the V-chip I said. Whats a V-chip he asked. I don't even have kids, and I had to tell him what it was. I bet he still doesn't use it...

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[sqrt(2)]

A friend of mine has kids, hes in his mid 20s... His first mistake.

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[Chief Wongoller]

Maybe there is merit in tagging all children. Millions of children go missing every year around the world, around 800000 do so in the US alone (http://www.usd.edu/~mcarroll/missing_children_statistics.htm).

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[mastershake_phd]

Maybe there is merit in tagging all children. Millions of children go missing every year around the world, around 800000 do so in the US alone (http://www.usd.edu/~mcarroll/missing_children_statistics.htm).

From your source " 876,213 missing persons (adults and juveniles) were entered into the FBI's NCIC during the year 2000."

Most of the kids who are reported missing are found obviously, and tagging them would help find them faster. But, out of all those missing children very few are taken by strangers every year in the USA, 115 child abductions in 1999.

PDF Warning: http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/nismart2_nonfamily.pdf

Re:Sucks to be Young (sometimes)

[houghi]

Meh. By then parents will be so busy doing their own stuff and generally neglecting their children that there won't be anyone to watch the monitors, so it all cancels out in the end.

Hey, why don't we let the monitors watch the children. Oh wait ... Never mind.

can != does

[s4m7]

The article also notes that these ultra-high resolution GPS trackers can allow freedom as much as restrict it Yeah, and a scuba tank can offer death as much as it offers life, but rarely does when used properly.

first poop!

[flamelord]

wohooo fp

Why stop there?

[iminplaya]

Put on electric collars that zap you if you step "out of bounds". Easy to see where this will lead.

Re:Why stop there?

[houghi]

Put on electric collars that zap you if you step "out of bounds". Easy to see where this will lead.

In case anybody wants to patent it: Prior Art.

Re:Why stop there?

[n dot l]

Easy to see where this will lead. It'll either be the generation that grows up hopelessly deranged because of the constant surveilance, or the generation that grows into docile little drones that do as they're told because they can't shake the feeling that someone's watching them...

Put on electric collars that zap you if you step "out of bounds". Heh. While they're at it they can give the collar the voice of GLaDOS so it can issue warnings, instructions, and inspirational anecdotes.*

* Those that haven't played Portal, or listened to someone who has played Portal rant incessantly about the Weighted Companion Cube, are excused from getting this joke.

Re:Why stop there?

[clickclickdrone]

Plus at least one episode of ST TOS I can think of.

Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Stanislav_J]

Using this technology to keep alzheimer's victims from wandering off or hurting themseleves is about the least objectionable "tattletale" scenario I can think of. Going to the other end of the spectrum; say, routinely tracking a driver's movements in his own private car....ah, not so much. Technology itself is neutral, and while it can be used for the betterment of mankind, there will always be the temptation to expand a successful tracking technology for use in ever widening circles of privacy violations. That is why we need strong, sensible legislation to prevent abuses and draw boundries. Unfortunately, that requires strong, sensible politicians to make the law, and I don't think they're making any of those anymore.

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Thrip]

Technology itself is neutral Thanks for wasting everyone's time by mindlessly quoting a cliche. Now go sit somewhere and think (if you remember how) about that for half and hour and then come back and tell us if you still believe it. A guillotine is not neutral. It has one purpose: public execution. A gasoline engine requires gasoline, with a set of results that may not have been predictable at the time of invention, but certainly are not "neutral."

True, the morality of something like a GPS is much harder to weigh than, say, a flamethrower. But that is a reason to be more careful, not less. We pretty much accept that when people develop a new piece of hardware, they have a responsibility to make sure it won't explode in your face (unless it's, you know, a face-exploder, which I'm sure someone is working on in God's great US of A). When your bank put's up a new web site, we all presume they have spent a lot of time making sure it's secure. It's about time we started holding technology companies just as responsible for thinking through privacy issues before releasing something.

If the mp3 player catches fire in your pants, it's broken and should not have been released. If the website lets hackers get your bank account number, it's broken and should not have been released. If the car tells dad you spent the night at your girlfriend's house instead of at boy scouts, or tells the department of homeland security you stopped by the mosque, it's broken and should not have been released.

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[maxume]

If people in general were strong and sensible, we wouldn't need legislation to protect us from stupid. Anybody who looks at American style democracy and thinks that 'the problem' is the system has an incredible disconnect between their extremely pessimistic and cynical view of one small group of people, and their hilariously optimistic view of another large group of people.

The world gets better when people refuse to give ground on things that they consider principles, rather than hand waving about things they should be calling preferences. It's amazing just how far we have gotten.

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[schmiddy]

If the car tells dad you spent the night at your girlfriend's house instead of at boy scouts, or tells the department of homeland security you stopped by the mosque, it's broken and should not have been released.

Wow. Yet more of the attitude "the user is too dumb to make moral decisions on their own, so we have to make them for him". And you wonder why the government illegally seizes power in the name of a higher cause.

Keep in mind the exact same GPS unit could be used for keeping track of where you left your key ring as well as by the government to spy on you. Technology is neutral. How it's used is the problem. Your guillotine example is overly contrived, but let's look at it. According to wikipedia:

The basis for the machine's success was the belief that it was a humane form of execution, contrasting with the methods used in pre-revolutionary, ancien régime (old regime) France. In France, before the guillotine, members of the nobility were beheaded with a sword or axe, while commoners were usually hanged

Imagine if, in your ideal world, the guillotine had never been invented, or deployed, because anyone capable of inventing it thought like you. The french revolutionaries would have simply hanged/axed 'offenders'. And you would have to contrive an argument suggesting that the only useful purpose of a length of rope or an axe is for killing people. Nice troll.

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Thrip]

Wow. My sentiments exactly. This is an extremely confused screed you've got going here. Let's try to step through this and apply a little rational thought, shall we?

If the car tells dad you spent the night at your girlfriend's house instead of at boy scouts, or tells the department of homeland security you stopped by the mosque, it's broken and should not have been released. Yet more of the attitude "the user is too dumb to make moral decisions on their own, so we have to make them for him". Who exactly is "the user" here? The mosque visitor has no scope to apply a "moral decision" to not be tracked and thus profiled. Technology affects people beyond those who pay for it, thus free-market libertarianist bullshit doesn't really shed any light on this issue.

And you wonder why the government illegally seizes power in the name of a higher cause. No. I don't wonder that. That's very clear to me. What I wonder is why so many people help them do it. Thus my original post.

Your guillotine example is overly contrived Why, because it makes my point, which you don't like? It's not contrived at all -- it's taken from history. If you want an overly contrived example, here's one: suppose I invented a robot that identifies people's race by genetic analysis and pinches white people really, really hard in the ass. That would be technology, wouldn't it? Would it be "neutral?" Is it possible that (gasp) some technology might not be neutral?

Imagine if, in your ideal world, the guillotine had never been invented, or deployed, because anyone capable of inventing it thought like you. The french revolutionaries would have simply hanged/axed 'offenders'. Or maybe the madness would have ended a little more quickly because fewer people would have been willing to swing the axe than pull a lever. Probably not, but who knows? (Hint: not you.)

And you would have to contrive an argument suggesting that the only useful purpose of a length of rope or an axe is for killing people. Umm, no. Now you are arguing entirely with some imaginary strawman.

Nice troll. I would honestly like to know what makes you say my post is a troll. I laid out my arguments and backed them up with examples and analogies. Where is the troll part? Just that I disagree with you?

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[ryzvonusef]

i worship an idol? what, i never so one! man, why didn't anybody show me? seriously, if people go to levels of actually believing such stupidity.. HELLO! we worship one God and repect jesus as much as you do! Plz, think of us as terrorist as much as you like, but at least be knowledge-able about it...

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Stanislav_J]

I think you've gone way off base here. Yes, "technology is neutral" is a cliche, but believe it or not, sometimes cliches are true. Your specious guillotine example has already been discussed elsewhere. When I say "neutral," I don't mean that the potential uses or motives of the users are neutral -- I'm saying that, for example, a GPS system doesn't know or care who it is tracking or why -- the same technology can be used to protect the eldery or mentally ill, to locate a dangerous criminal, or to violate the privacy of a law-abiding citizen. It all depends on how the item is programmed and for what purpose -- when the human element is applied to the equation, that's when neutrality ceases.

Take guns. Now, I do not own one and am hardly a "gun nut," but there are legitimate reasons for guns to exist. Those might include hunting for food or sport (I personally abhor hunting, but defend your right or anyone else's to the practice), self-defense, stopping a criminal posing a threat to public safety, repelling an invading force, etc. They can also be used to kill or maim a defenseless convenience store clerk after stealing $50, to kill a witness who could potentially put you in jail, or to off your old lady after you've had one beer too many and she mouths off at you. (Though I'm sure a few would put that latter example into the first category.....)

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Thrip]

First -- apologies for the overly harsh tone of my earlier reply. Sometimes my rhetoric gets the better of me.

That said, please explain why the guillotine example is "specious." You can't dismiss an argument just because some moron disagreed with it. I think it's a very good example. A person manufacturing guillotines knows exactly what use they will be put to. If you believe there is a moral weight to capital punishment, then there is a moral weight to the manufacture of guillotines. Hard to get a more clear-cut example (heh heh).

The same logic applies to GPS systems. I believe there is a moral weight to the act of spying on people. This is especially true when carried out by a repressive government, but in my opinion, it's true even when carried out by a well-intentioned parent. People who make items that include GPS know that they are peddling a technology that enables spying. One of two things is going to happen: as a society, we are going to impress on them that they need to build privacy safeguards into their products, or we will be spied upon. A lot.

The "technology is neutral" mantra is just a cop out promoted by people who don't want to be held responsible for the bad things they have contributed to.

Re:Let's not use a wide brush here.....

[Bender0x7D1]

Well, if you consider a guillotine in context, it is actually a good thing. Prior to the guillotine, executions were done by hanging, or by using an axe - and a guillotine is a much more humane approach.

In hanging, if the drop was too short, you would slowly suffocate to death instead of getting a broken neck. When using a headsman and an axe, it wasn't that uncommon for the headsman to "miss" and require multiple blows to actually remove the head. With a guillotine, you guarantee a fast, relatively painless death.

So, in that context, a guillotine is a good invention. Now, it gets a bad name for "speeding up the execution process", which allows for more executions to take place, but it is still probably better than hiring 20 peasants with axes to help out. I doubt those condemned to die would be let go just because they didn't have enough rope, or enough people to swing an axe.

Yeah, that sounds great....

[Datamonstar]

... until the people who push this stuff gets a taste of it when their wives track their signal to the local red light district when they were supposed to be at the office working.

Re:Yeah, that sounds great....

[Anonymous Coward]

http://forgetmenotpanties.com/

Screw that

[JamesRose]

Just handcuff your kids to the nearest radiator.

Just add totalitarian regime

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you need to take the good with the bad.

I have no problem with GPS tracking in cars

[Shivetya]

when it comes to parents (the owners of the cars) who lend them to their children. I think every parent has the right to know where their car and child is. Giving a car to a child is a big hand over of responsbility but it does not end that responsibility for the parent. The child (adult for some) is entrusted to behave as the parent instructs and operation of a car outside of direct parental supervision is not a license to be a hooligan. Once the child becomes an adult by law or moves out the use of such a device should end.

We lose too many children every year to auto accidents and perhaps knowing they are being watched over will save a few from fruitless loss. It could do very well to protect them as well from actions outside of their control - giving responders guidance to where they are in an emergency.

Re:I have no problem with GPS tracking in cars

[Kokuyo]

Seriously? The kids we lose because they're just dumb fuckwads who think a few beer (as in ten) and some shots of vodka won't do anything to decrease their ability to drive are good for two reasons:

1: The more intelligent ones think twice about copying that
2: We're rid of some morons.

Now if we could get them to kill themselves without hurting others... that would be efficient.

Sometimes people die. Losing freedom over a bit of security is plain stupid.

Re:I have no problem with GPS tracking in cars

[Aetuneo]

Think about it from the other angle: If you know that you are being watched, and hence that you will be protected from harm, you are more likely to take risks. For example, if you know that a vehicle will stop before it hits you, because of some sort of automatic stop button in it, you are much more likely to walk across the street when there are vehicles coming, because they will not hurt you (of course, the chance of this increases when you are in a hurry, or when your senses are clouded by alcohol or drugs). Of course, eventually you will be too confident in your own safety, and will step out too quickly and get hit by a car, and perhaps killed.

Not such things as a ultra-high rez GPS?

[Lord Satri]

these ultra-high resolution GPS trackers Misleading. The article is clearer: "The change is powered less by new technologies than the artful combination of existing ones, mainly the Internet, cellphones and G.P.S. satellites."

Some info. GPS receivers, which most of them use U.S. 'GPS' satellites -and- Russian GLONASS satellites (and eventually Europe's GALILEO and China's COMPASS 'GPS' systems), don't really have multiple spatial resolutions, only one. But yes, there are differences. In the article's case, they mix it with other spatial data to get a better precision. The other options are rather simple. With a simple GPS, since the Clinton administration removed the voluntary signal noise (called selective availability), anyone gets about 18m accuracy (xy, coz in z, the spa rez is lower). But, if you live in North America, most modern GPS receivers are WAAS compatible and provides a spa rez of about 4m.

Now, how can you improve accuracy to higher levels? You can do DGPS. This will suit most needs. But, it can get even better, using the phase of the GPS signal and not the content of the signal itself, you can get an accuracy of 2mm !!! Yes, that's true and great, useful to monitor bridges (movements due to wind, traffic, temperature) at high resolution as friend did for his PhD. The caveat with these techniques is that they require serious post-processing (well, that was the case a few year ago, maybe this changed?) so there's no such thing as "real-time freaking high resolution GPS", but there is "real freaking high resolution GPS" geolocation possible. (and to finish with a shameless plug, see sig for news on that kind of stuff)

A new one for our area

[smchris]

that I haven't seen discussed.

Our bus/trolley system in Minneapolis/St Paul has been operating for years on a cash or disposable card system with the cards having unlimited monthly value or a cash value. They have recently completed testing and are pushing a swipe card that isn't disposable and has a unique serial number. You can add value to it online and a couple days later it will appear on the card when you use it. Obviously because the readers are a wifi connection to the system.

So it's all in the quality of the database and cooperation with law enforcement. It could be used for anything from data mining to track people in criminal and civil cases to a real-time estimation of position and direction. Of course, there is still the option to pay cash but many people won't.

Not for my kids

[throatmonster]

...and they are on the verge of teenage years. I've always refused to let them be fingerprinted, photo ID'd, whatever, in those programs that claim they only give the information to you (the parent) in case your child goes missing. It's far too easy to run afoul of laws, even when the activity itself is relatively benign. I'm going to give them every chance NOT to be tracked if they want to disappear.

Having said that, I make a lot of effort to know where my children are, in more ways than one. Not just physically, but mentally and emotionally. The physical stuff is really important when they are young. The mental and emotional stuff is really important as they get older. All the technology in the world won't replace good parenting.

Re:Not for my kids

[AgentPaper]

Funny, that. My mother refused to have me kid-printed when the friendly local law enforcement officer came to our school, but it wasn't because she felt that I should be able to run away - far from it. She didn't want my fingerprints, or any other identifying information, where the cops could get their hands on it. (Our local constabulary wasn't exactly known for its stringent adherence to due process, particularly where kids were concerned.)

That said, my parents always knew where I was, or at least who I was with. I had a few out-of-bounds areas (must be within two miles of home or school if unaccompanied, no riding bikes on major roads unless the road has a sidewalk), and I had to let them know if I was going to stay late at school or go to a friend's house, but other than that, they trusted that I was smart enough to stay away from trouble. (Either that, or they recognized that I was less likely to cause trouble if I was outside burning up energy than cooped in the house with nothing to do.)

Poor-man's GPS

[Sax Maniac]

No kidding. I accidentally discovered this a few years ago! I found out that I can use online banking to figure out where my wife is. Unlike GPS, it works indoors! Each bank card is like a satellite, the more you have the more accurate it becomes. Thus, the poor-man's GPS: in more ways than one.

Re:Poor-man's GPS

[cumin]

I tried that, but it did indeed make me a poor-man. In fact, it didn't take long until I couldn't make the payments. Unfortunately they didn't repo the wife, only turned off the service.

Bunch of idiots - this DOES increase freedom

[cumin]

Or one of the first independent generations in years?

Seriously, do you think that most kids get to go wherever they want as soon as they're old enough to ask? Do you think that most kids are at home because they want to be or because their parents feel like they aren't safe roaming the neighborhood? I doubt most kids in the last eighty years were allowed to visit neighbors or wander the neighborhood before they were fifteen. Two hundred years ago in colonial America, kids could just take off and play or hang out. Parents didn't need to restrict them because they were mostly safe, and mostly accountable. It was that kind of independence of mind that grew the minds our freedoms are based on. If you want a child to value freedom and have an independent spirit, you must give them a chance to exercise it and it would be called negligence in most cities in America to do so.

I can't get over the shock of how many idiots assume parents are less likely to let their kids experience life because of technology. Get a clue! Parents that keep their kids under lock and key will always be that paranoid, but if they can track their kids, then at least the kids might be able to leave the house before they turn eighteen.

Instead I see all these idiotic posts making the assumption that parents are letting their kids have freedom but just waiting for a gadget to restrict it. Morons! Those parents aren't letting their kids have freedom, those kids are on lock down right now and this might be a chance for them to actually get out from under the thumbs of worried guardians and all you can do is spout knee-jerk *responsibility is bad* crap.

Re:Bunch of idiots - this DOES increase freedom

[n dot l]

Instead I see all these idiotic posts making the assumption that parents are letting their kids have freedom but just waiting for a gadget to restrict it. I think you misunderstood what I and (possibly, I can't speak for anyone but myself) others are saying. The assumption is that parents these days are, by and large, the morns that "aren't letting their kids have freedom" and that much of the freedom that kids do get is had by evading the parents, which would become impossible if they were all tagged or collared with a tracking device. How free would you really be roaming the streets if you know your parents are probably watching and might yell at you over the little intercom or press the button that gives you a shock at any second?

Though, I as I posted earlier, I doubt parents would actually watch their kids. The damn things would probably be hooked up to monitoring software and computers would do the raising instead because from what I've seen the vast majority of modern parents are more interested in working long hours so that they can qualify for enough credit to live in a big house with nice things than they are in actually raising their children.

Re:Bunch of idiots - this DOES increase freedom

[Mr. Slippery]

I doubt most kids in the last eighty years were allowed to visit neighbors or wander the neighborhood before they were fifteen

WTF? Where and when did you grow up that kids were kept in the house all the time?

I was certainly wandering the neighborhood long before I was fifteen. Spent a lot of time playing in the woods even. Went over friends houses. Rode my bike to the library, to the arcade, to the mall. This was only about twenty-five years ago.

Not inherently bad...like any tool

[moxley]

Technologies like this always have good uses and bad uses.

It usually starts off with good uses - but also keep in mind, that when a government wants to have more control over the population or make a change that will have far, wide, and long ranging impacts they ALWAYS initially claim it is for the "good of the people and will never be abused."

Two examples? Your Social Security card. My original one has in big letters on the front" NOT TO BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES." Because at the time these SSNs were brought about there was a LOT of concern about EXACTLY what has happened, and people were assured it would never happen, and lo and behold, here it is.

The next example is the bullshit USA Patriot Act, which was "going t sunset in 2005" and "would onmloy be used against "suspected terrorists" (well, it seems we are all now suspected terrrorists, we are all being spied on and the legislation has been used in all sorts of non terror cases, many times abusively and illegally).

I am all for parents being able to do this with their children and pets, and for people whose mental faculties leave them vulnerable, but here is the other side that many people generally don't always understand (except for most of us /.'ers here as many of us work in IT):

Once a database has been created, the data is there. Even if it isn't being misused or shared with corporate/govt interests now, it can be at any point in the future if it is not properly managed/secured.

When you consider how powerful using a db in a relational manner is, especially if it is joined with other databases or correlated with other data; the usefulness of it to identify and track increases exponentially.

SO, my point is this: I love this sort of technology; but like any useful tool (be it a car, a firearm, a power saw) it must be respected. Like the objects I mentioned, the technology is not inherently bad and as a non-living object is not responsible for when it is misused - it is the person or company that is using it that is responsible, and just like you wouldn't want to give a firearm or car to someone who has not been trained properly in safety or takes such things lightly or has proven to be irresponsible; the same should be considered when trusting a company with your data. Like with a weapon or car, if you own it you should have it secured, failure to do so can result in the wrong person obtaining it and misusing it.

This is tricky when you are delaing with corporations, because they get sold, personnel changes....so if you use this sort of technology and have concerns about privacy, like a lot of us do (I personally have a HUGE problem with the potential for technology that I would purchase/use being used in an 'off-label' manner against me or my interests). Keep aware of the potential for this sort of technology to be used in a way you're not comfortable with, and do your best to choose wisely.

By your logic

[cumin]

Lets assume that the technology is used in exactly the way you suggest, to track the whereabouts of minors and people the government is afraid of.
As far as being watched by Dad, here are the real options:

• A. Dad lets Jr go to boy scouts because he knows that Jr tends to go where he said he would as he's proven, and Dad can check up on Jr just to make sure he's not knocking Susie up. Eventually Jr grows up but he's got a long history of being allowed to make his own decisions and mistakes so he enjoys his newfound freedom without regretting his choices too much along the way
• B. Dad doesn't let Jr go ANYWHERE unescorted because he has seen the way Jr watched Susie at the basketball game. Jr grows up just hoping for one chance to be his own man and soon finds himself paying child support to Susie and expelled from college because authority can only take so much rebellious attitude

As for being watched by Uncle Sam, here are the real options:

• A. Assid gets picked up one night by guys with guns and taken somewhere to be questioned, eventually he gets to see a lawyer but he gets held because there are phone calls to known and suspected terrorists. Assid might be innocent but his life is going to suck for a long time regardless. There are many instances of screamed "Where are they!?"
• B. Assid has a tracker put on his car by the guys with guns and he doesn't know it. See, Assid might be a terrorist, or he might not be, but now the gwg can track what he is up to and tell whether he is or not and maybe even get some information on the people that are really dangerous. The gwg know exactly where 'they' are.

<sarcasm>Oh yeah, I'm sure that *this* technology is bad. I'm sure that real knowledge of people's actions will be handled far worse than suspicions, cause people like, you know, ignore their suspicions and let people be free until they have proof. As for the people who are incapable of taking care of themselves and could wear tracking bracelets, screw their freedom.</sarcasm>

There are a lot of posts from people that seem really worried that they might get caught doing something and really don't want a society that can enforce it's rules. For those of you afraid of being caught, here is my suggestion to you: Either get the laws changed or STOP BREAKING THE LAW!

I'd call them morons, but it would be an insult to morons everywhere.

How hard to avoid - GPS reception is poor?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an avid Geocacher - I have problems with GPS coverage all the time - trees, buildings, canyons. Are these hidden devices and different than the consumer devices on the market? I can't imagine they're as accurate as is being touted in the articles. Perhaps on average the as the signal comes and goes, the position of a tracking device can be followed, but you'd think simply popping a tagged bag full of money in a metal trunk of a car would make it "disappear."

Any thoughts?

AC.

call a spde a spade

[dotmax]

The only reasonable response to crap like this is a spittle-flecked rant.

The simple irreducible fact of tech like these GPS nanny boxes is that they are castrating our society, and our next generation in particular. Disabling your [son's] vehicle because he was so [Mr. Burns air quotes] sneaky [/mr burns] as to drive to the next town is beyond assinine, it daddy-dicksizing, public humiliation and teaches ... just what does it teach? Not anything i want my future leaders to learn, that's for sure.

This stuff is championed by the same fucktard gutless risk averse sissies who brought us ... mandtory car seats (which ultimately drove the SUV explosion), parents driving their morbidly obese little fatties four blocks to school every day, chain link fences acros every yard, children kept indoors because it's too dangerous to actually "live" in their petri dish neighborhoods, grade school children xpelled for making gun-shaped finger gestures or carrying plastic picnic knives with their sack lunches ... Which is not to forget "antiterrorism" security theater or any number of oft-cited outrages to common sense.

spittle-flecked rant because there is mathematically precisely zero chance (and in the quantum mechanical universe, "zero" is saying a lot!) of reversing this trend. "We" , the larger corpus of /., the fans of comp.risks or Bruce Schneier etc see it and resist and understand the implications. But sadly, the larger corpus of slashdot and it's cohorts doesn't mater.

We will all be alive (assuming we haven't been sent off to nutcase camp) to speak our I Told You So's in another 20~40 years.

get off my porch!

Re:call a spde a spade

[omfglearntoplay]

Nice rant. While I don't see car seats as being too terrible, the rest of it is so horribly true it's sickening in an urban or suburban environment. The only way to get away from this stuff is to get away from the cities. Of course then you miss out on high paying jobs, fast food on every block, and high crime rates. Maybe I should sell my house, get a simple job, and go live on my deceased grandparents' land. To be honest, it is tempting. I can even get decent internet out in the boondocks now. But no matter where you run, this stuff is going to find you. Stop taking our damn freedoms away ppl!

When I tied my pup... he did the following.

[DaedalusHKX]

I didn't want to waste juice scaring the poor mutt, so we learned mutual respect, I respect that he can outrun me, he respects that I have food, snacks and a nice warm place to sleep. I want his company, he wants mine (or so I jokingly tell myself, but I'm a capitalist at heart, I already KNOW that he wants food, shelter and whatever else he can get from me, and trades his companionship for these things HE wants... and I find it an acceptable relationship/exchange. We both benefit.)

Now... when I first raised him, he chewed every leash, rope, cable I tied him with. Now, I began to use a STEEL mesh cable... guaranteed to hold a 100 lb dog. The little nutbag broke the first one and chewed through the next two. I finally got a BIG THICK cable and intertwined it with a chain... and that FINALLY did the trick.

So then he dug up the cork screw stake I had chained him to. Tied him to a tree then. That finally worked!! I was SO relieved.

A few days later, he got bored, and began chewing around the TREE I had tied him to. There was a nice 3 inch wide band missing bark and some pulp a bit below the spot where the chain looped around the tree.

THE LITTLE BUGGER WAS TRYING TO CHEW THE TREE IN HALF!!!!!!

Re:When I tied my pup... he did the following.

[Charcharodon]

:) That sounds familiar, mine did something similar before I tried the electric fence. The only way to make sure he'd stick around was that you had to be home, then he was more than happy to be by your side, but once you headed out the door to goto work or left him outside all day he'd hop the fence. My final solution was a doggy door, he hardly ever took off after that. I guess given the option to be able to go inside and sleep on whatever furniture he wanted was more appealing than going around the block.

Re:When I tied my pup... he did the following.

[DaedalusHKX]

I moved out towards the country, he's got a couple of acres to hunt on, now, and stuff to bark at, so he's a happy camper... and I think he's taken it as his duty to sleep all the time (good boy) but barks at all living things that come near.

The way I see it, as long as he's barking all is well, if he stops barking THEN I worry :)

ZZZTTTT!!! "Citizen must return to safe area..."

[omfglearntoplay]

That's what this sounds like. Walk out of line and Ow, Shock, ~ZZZTTTT~!.. in it's best Half-Life 2 civil announcement voice "Citizen must return to safe area. Any citizen who resists will be shipped to sector Delta for emotional retuning".