Slashdot Mirror


Global Mall Operator Starts Reading License Plates

First time accepted submitter skegg writes "Westfield Group, one of the largest shopping centre (mall) operators in the world, has launched a find-my-car iPhone app. The system uses a series of license plate reading cameras dotted throughout their multi-level car parks. Westfield said police could also use it to find stolen or unregistered vehicles. (Hello, slippery slope.) Initially launched in just one Sydney centre, it will be rolled-out to others if the trial is successful."

301 comments

  1. Slippery slope? by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Slippery slope? by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 5, Interesting

      While there is no expectation of privacy in public, there is a huge practical difference between automated tracking systems and manpower surveillance. A few well placed cameras could track as many cars as thousands of people could.

      Besides the law enforcement slippery slope, what about the commercial privacy concerns? It's not a stretch that such a system could be used to track how long you spend at the mall and where you went, especially if it were combined with a facial recognition system inside the mall. I know some of this is already possible just by tracking credit card purchases, but opening up yet another more invasive avenue for data collection is not something I welcome.

    2. Re:Slippery slope? by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Your second point is easily solved: don't park in their deck. You can always park in the lot of one of those little strip shopping centers that always surround malls, and simply walk across the street. Consider it as an opt-out.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:Slippery slope? by RobinEggs · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seriously. Cars, their registrations, and the license to drive them all involve no reasonable expectations or implicit rights to privacy whatsoever (the contents of cars are obviously a different issue).

      Cars are extremely expensive in multiple ways, for the individual, the society, and the human race at large; they're statistically more dangerous than all weapons, wars, and natural disasters put together; they're a million different costs and dangers in addition to their many obvious conveniences.

      Yet people persist in thinking cars are strictly personal possessions, which the state nor the public have any cause in tracking, taxing, or restricting in any way.

    4. Re:Slippery slope? by nmb3000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

      I believe the slippery slope the submitter is referring to is the widespread dissemination of license plate reading cameras. As with most technologies, it can be used for both good and ill.

      For example, it can be a convenience. This article is one example (helping people find their cars). Another is for controlled-access areas such as the university I attend. They recently switched from a RFID-style windshield sticker to these license plate cameras, claiming it will be faster to open the gates (false), that it would be less prone to failure (also false).

      The slippery part of these devices is that it's all to easy to re-purpose them. Very soon after installing the cameras at the controlled-access gates my university started mounting them on curbside free-standing poles all over campus. It is almost impossible to drive through campus (which I acknowledge is private property) without having your plate scanned. I'm sure this has somehow been sold as "keeping campus safe." Of course, what it really is, is a waste of money and an erosion of privacy.

      The same type of scenario could easily happen over an entire city once this technology becomes common enough. Pretty soon there's enough coverage that law enforcement (or anyone else, for that matter) might be able to pay for (or coerce via legislation) private owners to give them access to the data. Now "criminals" can be caught by simply driving past that Chevron station on the corner and detailed data mining of your personal travel habits is effortless and completely legal. The entire vehicle-owning public is suddenly under constant, real-time surveillance.

      I realize there is limited expectation of privacy in public places, and that license plates are easily visible on the outside of your vehicle. That doesn't change that this is an erosion of privacy. Just as stalking a person all over a city isn't legal, doing effectively the same thing via electronic means shouldn't be either (without a valid warrant).

      </tinfoil hat>

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    5. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While there is no expectation of privacy in public, there is a huge practical difference between automated tracking systems and manpower surveillance. A few well placed cameras could track as many cars as thousands of people could.

      Besides the law enforcement slippery slope, what about the commercial privacy concerns? It's not a stretch that such a system could be used to track how long you spend at the mall and where you went, especially if it were combined with a facial recognition system inside the mall. I know some of this is already possible just by tracking credit card purchases, but opening up yet another more invasive avenue for data collection is not something I welcome.

      What are you worried about? This makes traditional shopping the same as if you bought something on the internet.

      Let's compare:
      Internet: Amazon.com
      Real World: Westfield Malls

      Internet: IP address, Real World: Car License Plate
      Internet: Username, Real World: Facial recognition

      I bet most people who would have an issue with this "camera" system would have no issues placing their next Amazon.com order.

    6. Re:Slippery slope? by ross.w · · Score: 1

      There is a disconnect between the mall and the RTA who keep the licencing data. I'm pretty sure the NSW RTA will only hand over someones details if you intend to make a complaint. They won't do it to make your marketing easier. If that were not the case THAT would be good case for protest.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    7. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having recently got told my car would get towed from one of those little 'strip shopping centers' you talk about, I can tell you that they don't appreciate people taking up valuable parking space in their already miniscule parking areas.

      Honestly though if someone really wishes to retain their anonymity at this point in time they'd need to be able to disguise both themselves and their car each place they go.

      Good luck with that.

    8. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

      You're quite right!

      Of course instead of just tracking car IDs they should use motion tracking and biometrics to track everywhere you go when you get out of your car too, and let the agencies access that as well. Heck, tie it to your social security number so that at any moment any agency can flip a switch and see exactly what you're up to, who you're with, maybe even listen in to your conversations - CCTV in the UK does this. It'll probably help fight terrorism or child abuse, don't you know. And it'll all be cool with you because hey, you're in a public place.

      Maybe it's a slippery slope because it effectively creates a means to track you that wasn't there before, so while you may always have been in public you at least had an expectation that you weren't been "watched".

      It's stupid "technically.." reasoning like yours that helps the government encroach upon our private lives year after year.

    9. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left out:

      Internet: How long you were at the site, what you bought, how much you spent, Real World: How long you were parked at the building, who you arrived and/or left with, by extension what you bought and how much you spent, what you were wearing, and so on.

      In other words, internet: limited. Real world, not so much.

    10. Re:Slippery slope? by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, there IS an expectation of privacy. It is privacy through obscurity. When I am in a crowd of 100,000, I very reasonably expect to be LESS trackable than when I am sitting in my home alone. Pretty much every single person on the planet also has this expectation. They don't expect to have the person next to them not see them, but they do expect that anyone that knows them, or is investigating them will not see them.

      The meme of "Your is public, so have no expectation of privacy" is entirely false, and repeating it doesn't make it true.

    11. Re:Slippery slope? by SebZero · · Score: 1

      There is quite a large difference between a person watching and seeing you go past and a sleepless, tireless automaton tracking you to the distance of a car parking spot.

      I think you'll find there's a very large court case if your country that's actually trying to decide how much of a right to privacy even suspected criminals have with GPS tracking versus good ol' actual police officers following you: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/us/11gps.html

      What would be interesting to see what westfield's reaction would be if you had a mechanism (from LCD film to... duct tape) for covering up your license plate each time you enter it. While I don't know the specifics of the law as it pertains to carparks in Australia - I'm sure regardless of what the law is, the rent-a-cops would bar your entry stating "private property".

    12. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its possible to track all of those things on the internet too..

    13. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ah, the legal apologist. to them, as long as it's legal, it's moral, just, and completely harmless to the freedoms and civil rights of citizens. as we all know, the legal system in this country (and others) is completely flawless when it comes to social justice and health of the human psyche. there are no psychopaths at the top manipulating the whole mess to their advantage by passing laws which are psychologically and sociologically unhealthy for individuals as well as society at large.

      case in point, there's a big fucking difference between no expectation of privacy, and having your license plate number used to track your every move from place to place. yes, there IS a slippery slope here.. it starts with the parent companies which push their surveillance policies out to the rest.. eventually, the government just mandates it everywhere .

    14. Re:Slippery slope? by Dthief · · Score: 1
      I think you also forget that license plates are just large lettered ID tags for your car, someone using that very public, very easy to see information intelligently seems quite reasonable.

      I'd be curious to know how people in the UK feel about the congestion fee toll which also can essentially know when your car was at certain places.

      --
      www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
    15. Re:Slippery slope? by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      It's not a true "opt-out" unless the mall cops grab your groin or strip search you.

    16. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Actually, this isn't a public place. You're parking on their property. Don't like it, don't go there. It's that simple.

    17. Re:Slippery slope? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 0

      Online ordering is usually done from one location, usually home. When corporations act as the police-by-proxy, then you have situations like AT&T funneling your internet activity to the NSA, 80 year old grandmothers and printers being sued for 50 million by the RIAA, and finally the cameras of every public establishment are tracking your movements and purchase activity, in real time, funneling your real-life activity to the local Fusion Center.

      In a sense, them knowing your internet activity is far less creepy because you're usually in that one place when you're on. The involuntary plate scans and the continuous tracking that will inevitably follow you wherever you go is no different than a gang of lackeys on the phone with the police following you around all day, which in a sane universe would be called harassment. One could at least not bother to buy stuff over the internet or even use it at all. But if you want to drive you have to have a car, with a license plate, and you gotta buy gas to drive it and have your plate recorded by every camera you drive across. Paying cash will not help when they can still get the plates and their locations.

      And don't give me any righteous bullshit about public transportation. Try spending 5 hours a day getting to and from your job and them come and tell me how cool public transportation is.

    18. Re:Slippery slope? by segfault7375 · · Score: 1

      Actually, this isn't a public place. You're parking on their property. Don't like it, don't go there. It's that simple.

      wish i had mod points

    19. Re:Slippery slope? by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      so when some entity uses said information about your car to back you into a corner, you're a-ok with that?

      you're cherry picking statistics which is a red flag indicator for someone who'd rather push his favorite social agenda than speak the complete truth. there are LOTS of things which are 'extremely expensive in multiple ways, for the individual, the society, and the human race at large.' that doesn't justify being treated like criminals.

    20. Re:Slippery slope? by deniable · · Score: 1

      Come to Western Australia where public servants got busted selling licensing data to a parking operator. Then again, our police got caught random breath testing / license checking empty cars at shopping centres.

    21. Re:Slippery slope? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The real solution is paintball guns. Just shoot the camera's in the area where you parked. If a couple of people do this over a few weeks, none of the cameras will wind up working.

      Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    22. Re:Slippery slope? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

      Ah, but there [i]is[/i] an expectation of privacy.

      The general population does not expect that the mere act of going shopping will cause the date, location and duration of such normal activities to be permanently recorded by a large, well-funded organization in a database with practically no access controls.

      Furthermore, the american jurisprudence (Katz v United States) which established the concept of "no privacy in public spaces" was written in 1967 - a time when wide-spread surveillance and, more importantly, essentially infinite-sized databases were only the stuff of science fiction.

      Technology has progressed and the law needs to catch up.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    23. Re:Slippery slope? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that they're using the same technology that our parking enforcement officers use. It's basically a car mounted camera system that scans license plates.

      As much as I'm opposed to this practice, it isn't without upsides. It would make it easier to identify stalkers in cases where license plates are known. But ultimately, it's not worth it, it's just too easy to side step the protection for the amount of privacy that has to be given up.

    24. Re:Slippery slope? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      The difference is that ones IP is probably changing regularly and the log in information that you give Amazon is the only way anybody's managed to figure out how to make the transactions work. Whereas malls have been around for ages without needing to keep that information, in fact most will even take cash for services or items without looking at you weird.

    25. Re:Slippery slope? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Wonder if it would be legal to cover your plate when it is parked. I don't recall any requirement that your plate me visible when you weren't operating it. Otherwise it would be illegal to use car covers and such.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    26. Re:Slippery slope? by RobinEggs · · Score: 2

      And hypothetical complaints about a mysterious, nefarious "some entity" using the system to "back me into a corner" isn't pushing some sort of agenda?

      Not all surrender of privacy and anonymity amounts to being treated like a criminal; not all systems will inevitably and automatically be used in most seditious, conspiracy-oriented ways.

      The "complete truth" you want me to speak is not an objective, independent truth; it's a personal, hypothetical fear of yours, and every bit as much of an "agenda" as what I'm talking about.

    27. Re:Slippery slope? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Very soon after installing the cameras at the controlled-access gates my university started mounting them on curbside free-standing poles all over campus. It is almost impossible to drive through campus (which I acknowledge is private property) without having your plate scanned.

      If it is private property, you have no legal requirement to display your license plate. I'd very much like to purchase a license-plate obscurer that could be hooked up to a GPS unit so that it would automatically cover up my plate as I left the public roads for a parking-lot or wherever.

      FWIW, I read a couple of years back that Target was surreptitiously deploying such ANPR cameras to all of their parking lots. I can't easily dig up the article via google because, as you might imagine, "target" is way too generic of a search term, however "Target CSI" yields some related info that is disturbing.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    28. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Excellent points. This is private property and they have a right to look at their own property. They're actually way behind what websites can already do. And yes I understand physical presence is a completely different thing than browsing the web.

      A far slipperier slope would be letting government dictate what people can do at their own property.

      Personally, I'd rather shop where car thieves are deterred. It would also be nice to know if my own car is leaving without me and that's probably the next step.

      People are going to use camera more and more to prevent crime. They'll do it at home with cameras and software that detects certain behaviors and that will actually record criminal acts day and night. They'll alert you and then the police. Some day, robotic cameras will even follow the criminals and send data to the cops.

      Petty crime and burglary is going to get harder. And that's going to make life less stressful for the non-criminals among us.

    29. Re:Slippery slope? by causality · · Score: 1

      And hypothetical complaints about a mysterious, nefarious "some entity" using the system to "back me into a corner" isn't pushing some sort of agenda? Not all surrender of privacy and anonymity amounts to being treated like a criminal; not all systems will inevitably and automatically be used in most seditious, conspiracy-oriented ways. The "complete truth" you want me to speak is not an objective, independent truth; it's a personal, hypothetical fear of yours, and every bit as much of an "agenda" as what I'm talking about.

      How do you continue to justify this system in the face of facts which are very clear and objective: we as a species have managed to survive without this, and shopping malls have continued to be relatively safe and profitable places of business for all of this time without such systems? In light of this, why do you think the risks are worthwhile and should be disregarded?

      I say the burden of proof is on the person who supports new methods of tracking people. The sane default isn't "why not?", it's "why?".

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    30. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure the retailers at this mall really appreciate you advising people to stay away.

    31. Re:Slippery slope? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      except property rights aren't absolute in this era of pervasive policing... try shooting someone who invades your home.. it isn't a foregone conclusion that you won't join him in prison.... unless of course you're a wealthy businessman who owns whole chains of malls and outlets throughout the country whose government you have in your pocket. the end result is that such policing hurts the little people. ...just another example of business and government cooperating to ensure your trip-up at some point so that they (one, the other, or both) may profit financially or politically.

    32. Re:Slippery slope? by xigxag · · Score: 1

      A far slipperier slope would be letting government dictate what people can do at their own property.

      Government can already dictate what people can do at their own property, to the extent where there really isn't any longer a slope to slip down.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    33. Re:Slippery slope? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      I have no ulterior motive other than to protect myself from public and private organizations that have known track records for collecting information about people and placing it in warchests for future conflicts.

      Not all surrender of privacy and anonymity amounts to being treated like a criminal; not all systems will inevitably and automatically be used in most seditious, conspiracy-oriented ways.

      Never said this.. However, that's the current trend nowadays. This is accelerating due to nonlinear increases in technical capability over time. Do you really want law enforced by machine augmented bureaucracies?

      The "complete truth" you want me to speak is not an objective, independent truth; it's a personal, hypothetical fear of yours, and every bit as much of an "agenda" as what I'm talking about.

      a lot more objective evidence supports mine than it does yours. your hypothetical fear of people doing terrible things should they have some power in their personal lives besides choosing which fast food restaurant they go to before/after work, and what corporate-whitewashed dreck to watch on tv when they get home is what concerns me. people like you are the reason authoritarian socialism will become the next ideology of tyranny.

    34. Re:Slippery slope? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they don't care. The guy worrying abou the police finding his unregistered car in the parking lot likely isn't that big a spender and you likely don't want him getting store credit either.
       

    35. Re:Slippery slope? by RobinEggs · · Score: 2

      If you read what I've written I'm not actually justifying this system at all; my point all along has been more general than that. I simply believe that cars aren't a strictly private, strictly personal possession and I'm tired of people pretending that they are. Cars physically interconnect all our lives and, with their massive fiscal and environmental costs, they directly connect all of our destinies, as well. Our entire lives, at least in the US, are designed around then. I'm not arguing for the abolition of cars, and I don't actually care one way or another about this particular issue; I'm just tired of ignorant individualists, many of whom border on anarchists, who believe they have a right to unlimited, unrestricted use of automobiles. They're a public good, not a private right.

    36. Re:Slippery slope? by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure you're allowed to park in a shared space like that if it's not posted, so long as you're not doing something stupid like overnighting. They can kiss your ass.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    37. Re:Slippery slope? by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Guess I'll have to start backing in then! (we don't have plates on the front, around here)

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    38. Re:Slippery slope? by inkscapee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, this isn't a public place. You're parking on their property. Don't like it, don't go there. It's that simple.

      Just walk away has always been stupid advice. It doesn't change anything. Why are there always a bunch of dummies who preach this? We should always speak up and protest abusive practices. Following your 'don't go there' advice doesn't improve anything, it just narrows our options and encourages this sort of crap.

    39. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Japan, a valet will cover your number plate for you when you check into a love hotel.

    40. Re:Slippery slope? by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 1

      Should it be illegal for me to record the plates of cars going by my house or business? Why or why not?

    41. Re:Slippery slope? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      I don't see anyone claiming they're in a vacuum here. you proceeded from a false assumption so you could launch a tirade at a strawman - the contextually driven implication being that resistance to being tracked by car = irrational idiot. Also, you can make all those arguments you listed for just about anything.. Apparently the only way to keep people like yourself happy is to preemptively lock everyone into concrete dorms from cradle to grave so that no one ever does anything self-serving that somehow 'harms' the 'common good.' I'm sorry, but that devalues the point of life to 'not worth living' status in my book. Just to keep you on track, no I never once implied I'm an anarchist, though if society did embrace anarchism and remained stable, it would be a testament to true progress of humanity.. we would've completely outgrown the baby sitter you so dearly cling to.

      Your complaints about extremists expose your own extremism. Cars ARE personal possessions (for argument sake I'll assume you're a US resident like me), and they should be considering how much they cost to buy and operate (a lot of that being artificially imposed by the state under the guise of environmental impact, yet most of the money does not go to recoup environmental damage). I'm sorry you are deluded about where your tax dollars go.. it would be nice if they actually went towards the things they were supposed to fund, and those agencies receiving the money actually did their jobs like their continued salaries depended on it, but it's just not true...anywhere in the world.

    42. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is, you accept that surveillance is acceptable, and normal. Some of us do not. It is none of the police department's business where I go, what I do, who I see, or how long I might meet with any person. None of their business. Basically, widespread surveillance relieves the police of doing real police work.

      I can justify surveillance inside of a business place that is commonly subject to armed robbery and/or shoplifting. I cannot justify surveillance of public streets, parking logs, and business places that aren't commonly targeted by thieves.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    43. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Parking lots are private property, owned by the individual vendor, or by the strip mall owner. I used to be a truck driver, and it didn't take long to figure out that almost all property is private property. A lot of good parking lots are posted "No truck parking", and stopping to get a burger to go would mean a ticket if a cop happened to come by.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    44. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the EU it would be illegal, unless you have both the consent of the car owners and a justification for needing the data. As for why, the EU privacy legislation starts from the premise that people have a right to privacy, and that right is sufficient to restrict the rights of others to work on personal data.

    45. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh - yeah. And, at no time during your approach and backing maneuver will the camera have a clear shot at your license plate, right?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    46. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In some states, it is illegal, under certain oft-slashdotted wiretapping laws.

    47. Re:Slippery slope? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Your second point is easily solved: don't park in their deck. You can always park in the lot of one of those little strip shopping centers that always surround malls, and simply walk across the street. Consider it as an opt-out.

      Or take transit. or...

      Just because most people drive their cars to the mall doesn't mean you have to. If you live close enough, perhaps walking is an option (especially if you work nearby). If a bit further, there's always public transit, or biking. (Malls are generally transit hubs, too).

      Or not use the mall - there's no law stating one must spend a day shopping in a mall... working near a mall, I'm surprised how many of my coworkers simply never visited the mall - despite it being attached to the lobby.

    48. Re:Slippery slope? by iamhassi · · Score: 2

      How is this a slippery slope?

      It's a slippery slope because I can use it to find out my wife is still at the mall and I can slippery slope my way to my favorite websites.

      I, for one, welcome our new wife monitoring systems.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    49. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The general population probably doesn't care because they aren't doing anything that would matter if someone knows. But they probably would appreciate the car burglar driving into the parking lot being busted.

    50. Re:Slippery slope? by Antarius · · Score: 2

      Except that this is Sydney Australia, not Sydney Florida.

      Paintball guns here require a firearms license. Such a low population of the country has said license, that they'd be able to quickly catch and prosecute the perpetrators for illegally carrying "firearms" in public.

      Yeah, a paintball or BB-gun will get you in the shit. =p

    51. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The malls are not public places. They are private commercial businesses.

      Rumour is that many of the petrol stations here have been using ANPR for ages, even have direct access to the police systems.

    52. Re:Slippery slope? by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      Doubt it. It probably varies by jurisdiction, but here (northern CA) you can get in trouble for parking on the street with out of date registration tags. Not sure how that translates to parking garages...

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    53. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In our town we have police cars with a bunch of cameras mounted on top of them that just sit in the middle of the road. They scan all the cars license plates driving in both directions and if you have out of date tags or no insurance it will immediately pop up and notify them to pull you over, this may be nice since I've been hit by people without insurance more than once and it cost me some big $$$ out of my own pocket. The problem is they also pull you over for late tickets and parking fines which some people simply can't always afford to pay on time. While I'm glad they're removing people without insurance from the roads I'm sure they will use it to make money any way they can. Once they put cameras everywhere they can fine everyone for everything and make even more money.

    54. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

      The authorities say otherwise. If you record them, in public, broad daylight, in the middle of a major intersection, you will be charged with wiretapping and violating the officers privacy.

      And I must assume the law is the same for everyone, so its just as illegal for the cops (or anyone) to record you!

    55. Re:Slippery slope? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      That's why GP has specifically said:

      I'm pretty sure you're allowed to park in a shared space like that if it's not posted

      Though, admittedly, I don't recall when I've last seen a parking lot without some kind of "for customers only" note posted.

    56. Re:Slippery slope? by dbet · · Score: 2

      Should it be illegal? It should be fine if you write down stuff on a notepad and keep it to yourself. If you publish the info or make it available to anyone else, you should spend time in jail.

      The same was true (may still be) of people who used scanners to hear neighbor's wireless phone calls. It was legal to use a scanner, it was illegal to share anything you heard.

      Else one could say, record every car that parked at planned parenthood and share the info, or worse, threaten to share it unless payments were made.

      And no, it's not okay for police to do it either unless they're targeting a specific person for a specific crime.

    57. Re:Slippery slope? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Yes, there IS an expectation of privacy. It is privacy through obscurity. When I am in a crowd of 100,000, I very reasonably expect to be LESS trackable than when I am sitting in my home alone. Pretty much every single person on the planet also has this expectation.

      All these expectations are not set in stone, but are rather defined by what's feasible and what's not, and that changes as society evolves and technology progresses. Back when we had small towns instead of huge million-people citizes, one's expectations of privacy were much lower. They've got higher as we've got higher concentrations of people, and now they're getting lower again as technology is catching up and replacing simple observation as the way to track people.

      And I don't know about "pretty much every single person". I am definitely very much aware that there are loads of security cameras all around. In fact, it's hard not to - I mean, seriously, you don't see all those "smile, you're on the camera?" notes posted all around, or what? And I'm pretty sure that folk younger than me are pretty much taking it entirely for granted.

      Privacy through obscurity was a nice idea while it worked, but you cannot meaningfully enforce it.

    58. Re:Slippery slope? by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      If they can't afford a £30 parking ticket, how can they afford a £50 tank of petrol?

    59. Re:Slippery slope? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Or not use the mall - there's no law stating one must spend a day shopping in a mall.

      What good are rights if you can't exercise them without being a billionaire (the one who owns the mall)? Libertarianism - the push for the return to the good ol' days when rights were restricted to landowners (and only men could own land).

    60. Re:Slippery slope? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      All these expectations are not set in stone,

      No, they are set in law. In Australia we have privacy/data-collection laws. Using collected data for a purpose that the customer didn't authorise, or reasonably expect, or giving the data to a third party (including law enforcement without a court-order), is against that law.

      To be honest, I'm not sure how an automated system is going to comply with the law. There's no way to get the initial consent. (Merely driving into a carpark would not be considered reasonable consent under the law.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    61. Re:Slippery slope? by julesh · · Score: 1

      They recently switched from a RFID-style windshield sticker to these license plate cameras, claiming it will be faster to open the gates (false)

      It really ought to be true. I worked on a system like this nearly 10 years ago now that was capable of reliably identifying 2 vehicles per second while they passed a camera mounted approximately 50 metres from the road at speeds of up to 70mph. There's no reason the system shouldn't identify your vehicle before you've even stopped at the gate, and start opening while you're approaching, which is substantially better performance than most RFID systems (which tend to have operation ranges of a couple of metres max, thus requiring you to entirely stop before the gates begin opening).

    62. Re:Slippery slope? by johny42 · · Score: 1

      The cars are parked in a public place,

      It's not even a public place, it's their private place. I don't see any problem with them tracking their customers, as long as they're on their property. If you don't like it (I don't), just don't shop (or don't park your car) there.

    63. Re:Slippery slope? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      More to the point is it legal to cover your plate while on private Westfield property? If I make a device to do this can I be booked for potentially covering my plate while on public roads?

    64. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Internet: IP address

      If you're not using a proxy or a VPN.

      Internet: Username, Real World: Facial recognition

      A face could be used for far more things than a user name. Stalking someone (by knowing what they look like), for instance. That's possible with user names, too, but only if the user uses the same one on multiple websites.

    65. Re:Slippery slope? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Westfield Doncaster only has paid parking. Maybe the argument is that you become a customer when you take a ticket to enter the car park, and tracking you from then on is the same as tracking you at the cash register. And then you validate your parking ticket at the cash register and now your registration number is connected to your credit card number...

    66. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paintball guns here require a firearms license. Such a low population of the country has said license, that they'd be able to quickly catch and prosecute the perpetrators for illegally carrying "firearms" in public.

      I've been thinking lately about getting a Parrot Quadricoptor and seeing if I can mod it with a small tube out the front with a remote triggered paint spray, so I can disable intrusive cameras mounted on poles that would otherwise be way out of reach.. I've not actually seen one in the real but it seems that with the indoor rotors it should be possible to fly within a couple of feet of a camera fairly safely (at least not fatal, if you bump), but I'd have to see how much tube it could carry without being destabilised

      of course, they could always small rc craft like this illegal..

    67. Re:Slippery slope? by taustin · · Score: 2

      If enough people don't go there, the company that runs the mall will go out of business. If that doesn't happen, then, clearly, the majority clearly just don't care. Vent about your pet peeve all you want - you have that right - but don't expect other people to care about stuff they don't care about.

    68. Re:Slippery slope? by Plunky · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious to know how people in the UK feel about the congestion fee toll which also can essentially know when your car was at certain places.

      You'd probably be more curious to know how people in the UK feel about the automatic number plate recognition cameras that are installed all over the country which already essentially know when your car was at certain places, and the data is available in real time to the police.

    69. Re:Slippery slope? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Plus it sounds like this data will be publicly available. How do they plan to ensure that you are the rightful owner of a car and not just someone who waits until you park your car a long way from home and then steals all your stuff safe in the knowledge that you won't be back any time soon? Or that you are not the abusive husband who wants to keep tabs on his wife's movements? Or the employer who wants to make sure his staff are not interviewing with competitors, or visiting hospital?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    70. Re:Slippery slope? by Plunky · · Score: 1

      What would be interesting to see what westfield's reaction would be if you had a mechanism (from LCD film to... duct tape) for covering up your license plate each time you enter it. While I don't know the specifics of the law as it pertains to carparks in Australia - I'm sure regardless of what the law is, the rent-a-cops would bar your entry stating "private property".

      The device I'm imagining would be a blank reflective backplate of the correct colour with an LCD overlay that could display any number and look like a real plate. Couple this with a camera with numberplate recognition software built into the vehicle and you can adapt your plate continuously according to the traffic stream. In fact you have two cameras front and rear, and you just turn invisible as your rear plate shows what the rear plate of the car in front is displaying, and your front plate shows what the front plate of the car behind is showing.

      I wonder how long it will be before such a device is a) possible to make, and b) available to buy..

    71. Re:Slippery slope? by chrism238 · · Score: 1

      You're not from Australia, are you?

    72. Re:Slippery slope? by chrism238 · · Score: 1

      " the american jurisprudence" blah, blah, blah. Did you read the bit where this story if from *Australia*?

    73. Re:Slippery slope? by lucidlyTwisted · · Score: 1

      That option only exists when the there is a viable alternative. Once all private sites are using tracking, where does one go?
      There are much easier ways to let people find their vehicles that don't lead to privacy concerns; e.g. paint memorable pictures over the walls at various point "Oh yeah, we were just to the left of that giraffe on level 3"

    74. Re:Slippery slope? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      There are actually strip malls in BC (Canada) that actually have EACH SPOT marked as "for customers only". Not the name of the strip mall mind you, the store itself. Each storefront has 4-5 of these special spots each.

    75. Re:Slippery slope? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      hedwards was talking about a camera mounted on a small vehicle that drives up/down the stalls periodically scanning plates instead of mounting a whole bunch throughout the complex.

    76. Re:Slippery slope? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 2

      I think you a verb somewhere...

    77. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's some part of 'no expectation of privacy' that you may be overlooking here.

    78. Re:Slippery slope? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      The real solution is paintball guns. Just shoot the camera's in the area where you parked. If a couple of people do this over a few weeks, none of the cameras will wind up working.

      Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary.

      Most paintballs are made with water soluble paint for obvious reasons.

    79. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the bit that said, "Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S." ?

    80. Re:Slippery slope? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Cars physically interconnect all our lives and, with their massive fiscal and environmental costs, they directly connect all of our destinies, as well. Our entire lives, at least in the US, are designed around then. ... They're a public good, not a private right.

      That exact same argument can be made about houses, only more so. I think you would have a hell of a time arguing that houses are a public good.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    81. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're walking through the mall, and one guy bumps you and keeps walking and you feel your pants pocket and, oops, no wallet. With no wallet, you have lost your credit cards (you DO have all those notification numbers written down, don't you?), your driver's license (easy to replace, just spend a few hours at the Motor Vehicle Agency), and your cash and undeposited paycheck (your ATM card was taken so no cash, and it'll take a month to get your paycheck reissued).

      Go to mall security. Ask to file a report. They say, "describe the guy."
      File a police report. They say, "describe the guy. List what was stolen." Then they tell you that they have a very poor track record of catching this kind of criminal, and your best bet is to cancel all your cards immediately, notify your bank to cancel the ATM card, and get a new license.

      Then they casually mention, this happens here a couple times a week, it's a big mall.

      Now you're identity's been stolen, you have to recover, and the guy gets away to do the same thing the next day or two.

      Would you like to have this guy caught?

      Suggesting the police do their job makes no sense. How do you propose they catch someone YOU didn't even notice? Burglaries and robberies of individuals are the LEAST likely crimes to be solved. Maybe they should put lots more police at the mall to MAYBE catch this guy (who are they looking for? You can't describe him.) Maybe the mall should hire more security people? Mall rent goes up, prices go up.

      A mall is a business place that is commonly targeted by thieves.

    82. Re:Slippery slope? by QuantumG · · Score: 2

      protest

      People keep using this word.. I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean what they think it means.

      You can petition your government for grievances.. you can take your grievances with Woolworths and shove 'em where the sun don't shine. Ya know, we tried to give you a word that means what you want.. "boycott", but that actually requires you to go without and that's not what you want is it? You just want to whine and throw tantrums when you don't get your way.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    83. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I can record every minute of you in "public" and you have no problem with that?

    84. Re:Slippery slope? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Then they can talk to the person who owns the mall and the parking space and say that the decision will cost them business and may mean that they have to close their shops.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    85. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Governments physically interconnect all our lives and, with their massive fiscal and environmental costs, they directly connect all of our destinies, as well. Our entire lives, at least in the US, are designed around them. I'm not arguing for the abolition of governments, and I don't actually care one way or another about this particular issue; I'm just tired of ignorant statists, many of whom border on fascists, who believe they have a right to unlimited, unrestricted government power.

    86. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Following your 'don't go there' advice doesn't improve anything, it just narrows our options and encourages this sort of crap.

      That's because people do not actually not go there. Boycott doesn't mean declaring not to go there, it means actually not going there.

    87. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a public space but a private parking garage. As long as the customers are made aware that the surveillance is in place, your outrage is misplaced. You can always choose to shop elsewhere, or walk to the mall.

    88. Re:Slippery slope? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Yes how long you park at a mall is a proof of a criminal act, or the fact you went shopping at the mall.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    89. Re:Slippery slope? by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      Mall parking lots are a fairly common target of thieves from what I understand. Many simply walk down the line of cars trying doors to find an unlocked one, taking anything of value they find.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    90. Re:Slippery slope? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S

      The last time Slashdot published statistics (a couple of years back), 51% of its readership was in the US. Hardly the 'vast majority'. That text was there when I started reading Slashdot a decade ago, and probably hasn't been updated since. I wouldn't be surprised if American were a minority on Slashdot these days.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    91. Re:Slippery slope? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, you accept that surveillance is acceptable, and normal.

      Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence.

      Some of us do not.

      The converse is also true.

      It is none of the police department's business where I go, what I do, who I see, or how long I might meet with any person. None of their business. Basically, widespread surveillance relieves the police of doing real police work.

      No, no it doesn't, because in and of itself that should not be enough to convict you of anything. Also, this is not the police knowing where you are, but a mall knowing where you are. You're on their property and they want to be able to find your car. I personally want Trek-esque location services in my house... you know, "computer, locate Runaway1956." And if you don't like me knowing what room you're in, don't come into my house. And if you don't like me knowing where you're parked, don't park on my property. It's my property, and I have a right to know what's going on there.

      Now, I would be quite upset to learn they're giving this information to the police without a subpoena, and I wouldn't want to shop there in that case.

      I cannot justify surveillance of public streets, parking logs, and business places that aren't commonly targeted by thieves.

      Oddly, public streets, parking lots, and business places are all commonly targeted by thieves. I know that's now how you meant your sentence to be parsed, but I have a logical parser, not a directed one.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    92. Re:Slippery slope? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Every car has its number plate recorded and entered into a database anyway. All this will do is put the parking attendants out of a job.

    93. Re:Slippery slope? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious to know how people in the UK feel about the congestion fee toll which also can essentially know when your car was at certain places.

      I'm in the UK. It's completely irrelevant to me. The only city with congestion charge cameras is London, and I haven't been there for about 20 years. I can't see myself driving there any time in the future, either.

    94. Re:Slippery slope? by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Individuals spend many years of their lives working to pay for cars. Since the collective doesn't hand them out for free, your view borders of fascism, since corporations get a mobile workforce at low cost, and the state maintains control of movement to make sure that workers don't divert from a straight line between garage and workplace. State and corporate agents of course are mostly unaffected by vehicle restrictions and monitoring.

    95. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People repeat a lot of pathetic nonsense like that. Such as "you have no right to drive or to fly [therefore you have to put up with whatever ineffective BS law enforcement wants to do to you this week]", or even the novel and pretty stupid "you have a car and some cars contain people who cause problems, so you have no privacy even though you aren't doing anything wrong and you're not causing problems today" argument. Privacy through obscurity isn't exactly secure, but it is a human expectation. You're not easy to pick out of a crowd of 10,000. Unless somebody's already after you. Unless you do something to deliberately or accidentally to call attention to yourself. OR....unless somebody is using highly automated systems to do the tracking--systems which are usually either secretely deployed or touted as a "benefit" as they are here. Now, the "unless somebody's after you" or "unless you call attention to yourself" exceptions are under your control or at least don't usually occur without your knowledge. If you're a wanted criminal for a normal crime you probably have a decent idea about that for instance. The highly automated systems part--most people don't go about their lives looking for the tracking device or paying attention to the latest privacy violation du jour cloaked in excuses like "you're in public" which date from a time when automated tracking systems didn't exist. Curiosity and logic have, for the most part, been trained out of most people. I'm curious, I look for these things in my daily life, and while I wish it was tinfoil hat stuff, finding such stuff is too easy these days. Damn everyone who just sits back and allows our societies to come to this.

    96. Re:Slippery slope? by hrvatska · · Score: 1

      Your second point is easily solved: don't park in their deck. You can always park in the lot of one of those little strip shopping centers that always surround malls, and simply walk across the street. Consider it as an opt-out.

      None of the malls in my area have strip shopping centers near them that can be reached easily by pedestrians. Either there are physical barriers (streams, fences, or thorny brush) or getting from the strip shopping center to the mall involves walking along or across roadways that are arguably dangerous to be on as a pedestrian. And then there is the issue of needing to carry your purchases from the mall to your hard to get to vehicle. Throw in some inclement weather and it makes parking outside the mall parking lots even less attractive. Add a few young children into the mix and parking off mall would be out of the question.

    97. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence."

      So, you advocate the acceptance of terrorist attacks?
      Internment camps?
      Mass executions?
      Genocide?

      Just because something happens, doesn't mean that we need to accept it as the new baseline of "acceptable".

    98. Re:Slippery slope? by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Just because something happens, doesn't mean that we need to accept it as the new baseline of "acceptable".

      No, but because we do something most certainly does mean that we should expect it to be done back to us. We have done all of the things you describe in recent history, and in numerous countries. One great example is Panama. We invaded on a false pretext, killed many, many civilians, set up internment camps for the remainder of the people who were in our way, created mass graves on U.S. military bases for many of those we murdered... and essentially attempted genocide against the regional indigenes. And of course, it hardly bears repeating that this country was founded on the same process. Hell, I live in Kelseyville, which is named after a guy famous for oppression of the Pomo people. He enslaved, raped, and murdered them until his wife helped with his demise by wetting the powder. You might as well call this town Hitlerville. And it has a fucking reservation in it, too. How would you like to be a Jew living in Hitlerville?

      Face it, our whole society is based on this shit, and now we're shocked and amazed that it's happening to us, too.

      With that said, someone knowing where on their lot your car is... well, that's simply not the same thing as being tracked continually by the cops. If you carry a cellphone you already can be tracked quite effectively. If you drive on a public road you've already agreed to give up many of your rights. This is a non-issue.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    99. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe I've sided with the side of a little less privacy.

      Credit card purchases are more precise than going through the effort of trying to track people by their car. A plate is public information. If tracking you is their concern, I'm sure they could and do track you in a more efficient manner. If there is any concern about privacy, it would be other people not the system tracking your location. Have a stalker that knows your plate(s)?

    100. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you are so accepting of reality because you have a hard time seeing where this path leads? If a private company sets up a treasure trove of personal data, you can be someone (police, marketing agencies, thieves) will want to get their hands on it. Don't worry - the rest of us will stand up for your rights.

    101. Re:Slippery slope? by seekret · · Score: 1

      The thing that everyone seems to always forget when talking about public surveillance is that it's not anything that anyone couldn't get simply by looking out the window. Use a camera instead of your own eyeballs and it's suddenly a huge problem.

    102. Re:Slippery slope? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      I'll give you 3 examples:

      1) In Richardson Texas, the police drive through parking lots looking for expired tags and stickers. They know that if someone can't afford to inspect or tag their car they can not afford liability insurance. When they have spotted a car they wait until the owner drives away. They pull the car over, ticket the driver, then impound (steel) the car. If you don't have insurance the State takes possession of your car and the city that impounds it receives proceeds of the sale in addition to the money from the ticket.

      2) Cameras would effectively work the same as managers of apartment complexes. Managers get a kick back from tow truck drivers when they call them with a car that has expired tags or stickers. This would open the door for mall security guards to get the kick back.

      3) I'll give you a link and let you draw the obvious conclusion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZQ7Th9L5ss

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    103. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      "If you drive on a public road you've already agreed to give up many of your rights. This is a non-issue."

      "Mr. Runaway, you may not drive on our highways, unless and until you agree to give up some constitutionally guaranteed rights. Do you wish to travel on our highways?"

      Nooo, that's not coercion at all, now is it? Agreeing to give up your rights, and being coerced into such an "agreement" are not the same things.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    104. Re:Slippery slope? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence.

      But more usefully:

      "The difference between reality and unreality is that the former has so little to recommend it."
      --Allan Sherman

    105. Re:Slippery slope? by hplus · · Score: 1

      Or maybe, just maybe, he wants to let the mall operators know why he won't shop there anymore. Simply walking away with no explanation does no good.

    106. Re:Slippery slope? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      As long as they don't have DMV record access i tend to think its not a huge deal, even tho its 'automated'. Without that data, its just a bunch of abstract numbers stuck on various makes and models. ( am i happy about it? No. Would i boycott their mall? Yes. But its not a huge deal )

      Now that said, if they actually have DMV record access and can tie a plate number to a person on their own, then we have a problem that needs to be addressed by the courts as that is NOT public data in the first place.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    107. Re:Slippery slope? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      if it is private property, you have no legal requirement to display your license plate

      There is if the owners of said private property require it. I know of some that also require parking passes to be displayed at ALL times while on property.

      I can make it a requirement to have blue hair or you are trespassing. Thus you are legally required to have blue hair while on MY property.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    108. Re:Slippery slope? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      There are no retail parks near the Westfield Mall in Shepherd's Bush, London - the largest mall in Europe until their Stratford mall opens on Tuesday. It doesn't have any retail parks nearby either.

    109. Re:Slippery slope? by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      I think you also forget that license plates are just large lettered ID tags for your car, someone using that very public, very easy to see information intelligently seems quite reasonable.

      And making your car easily identifiable, for example when you are involved in an accident, or park it where you shouldn't, is the whole point of the license plate. A nice use of automatic license plate readers where I live is to find cars where the road tax hasn't been paid. Which implies that the driver is driving without insurance, because you can't get insurance without paying road tax. Which means I can be 100% sure that if the driver damages my car or someone else's, they will try their best not to pay for it.

    110. Re:Slippery slope? by russryan · · Score: 1

      Godwin! I called it first!

    111. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is if the owners of said private property require it. I know of some that also require parking passes to be displayed at ALL times while on property.

      And if you don't obey, they have to ask you to leave before they even have a chance of getting someone to prosecute you for trespass. Unlike driving on the public roadways without a license plate which will generally result in getting your car confiscated on the spot and you in jail. See the difference?

    112. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most paintballs are made with water soluble paint for obvious reasons.

      Most cameras are mounted with a weather shield and angled slightly downards, for obvious reasons.. So, the rain won't wash it off and in order to refurbish the cameras they will need to get a cherry picker or some kind of crane in. Makes it expensive to fix the cameras and they won't be fixed often.

    113. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assume the "after all" part is a justification. It's not, it's an observation.
      True or not, it doesn't change the fact that slashdot is US-centric.

      Furthermore chrism's a dumbass for assuming the specification of "american jurisprudence" means anything other a simple identification of the origin of that phrase. It isn't like he added anything useful to the conversation - if he was anything more than a picayune-minded public diddler he would have cited what, if any, Australian laws were applicable.

    114. Re:Slippery slope? by crispytwo · · Score: 1

      The same type of scenario could easily happen over an entire city once this technology becomes common enough. Pretty soon there's enough coverage that law enforcement (or anyone else, for that matter) might be able to pay for (or coerce via legislation) private owners to give them access to the data. Now "criminals" can be caught by simply driving past that Chevron station on the corner and detailed data mining of your personal travel habits is effortless and completely legal. The entire vehicle-owning public is suddenly under constant, real-time surveillance.

      I think that it is better to refer to "dissidents" rather than "criminals" in conversations like this one. Everyone gets bent up on the fact that someone is breaking a reasonable law, and being labelled a criminal. No one cares if a criminal, in the sanest sense, is caught.

      However, those that are fed up with insane public policy, gathering together, say, at a mall, then being tracked by these license plate finders. So, now we have license plates. We have times that a set of plates are together. We know a couple of people we want to keep an eye on with license plates X, Y, and Z. Looky looky, these people are at Mall A at the same time... hopefully the slippery slope is a little more obvious.

      Yes, we have to assume that we are being tracked. Yes, we have to assume all these things can and will be monitored. "To what end?" Is the question. "Find my car" is the end? Probably not, but maybe.

    115. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Parking lots are private property

      I was just going to get to that point.

      LCD smart glass license plate covers are only illegal if you get caught using them on public roads.
      Hook some up to your car and flip them on once you cross onto private property. Or a little before you do, if you're sure no cops are watching. Then, buy with cash and wear aviator shades inside the mall (to break facial recognition - that'll be the next thing). Then you're shopping anonymously.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    116. Re:Slippery slope? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Our species survived without fingerprints and DNA testing, but they've done great things for solving crimes. Plate readers and facial recognition cameras will make getting away with crime even more difficult. Wearing latex masks won't fool an intelligent system either that identifies a face with odd infrared or UV coloring and is walking a number of blocks to put distance between an owned or stolen vehicle and the criminals destination.

      While it's only fiction, as Captain Picard said to the holographic Moriarty, "Professor, I feel it necessary to point out that criminal behavior is as unacceptable in the 24th century as it was in the nineteenth - and very much harder to get away with."

      This technology could nearly stop carjackings, burglaries, identify suspects near the scene of arsons, rapes and murders, and catch all those and muggings on camera. We as a society lament spending more on police and dealing with crime than we do on education. Imagine if crime becomes so difficult to get away with, that many criminals give it up? Then we really could spend freed up resources on education, rehabilitation, and job training to turn our society around.

    117. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      A hexacopter will have plenty enough lift, but you'd have to hook up your own FPV system, you'll only have wifi control if you do it custom, and it'll cost more...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    118. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Bad news: The guy was wearing shades and a baseball cap, so the cameras can't see his face.

      Camera advantage nullified.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    119. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Now, I would be quite upset to learn they're giving this information to the police without a subpoena

      They'll probably have a handy web interface set up for the cops like the cell providers do.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    120. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Yes, because cameras don't sleep, blink, aren't limited to looking at one place at one time, and can be hooked up to facial/license plate recognition databases. Cameras DO make it a bigger problem.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    121. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Yep, unregulated capitalism allows for all the horrors of any other political system - while technically not using force. There's always the alternative of living like the Unabomber. See, no force!

      But right now you don't have to live like the Unabomber to avoid this crap, the Unabomber lifestyle is the core of the alternative, and that alternative gets whittled a little closer to the core every time corporations trump the common man. If you feel like you have to go out of your way to maintain your privacy and freedom more and more with every passing year, you're on the Unabomber side of the divide, and corporations are going to eat away at your options until you will literally have to either give in and become a good little consumer or live in a shack in the woods, cut off from civilization.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    122. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Let me put this into middle-class language for you: If you can't afford a $1000 fine, how can you afford $1700 in rent?*

      *You might not get this if you don't live paycheck to paycheck, as many people do. But, I tried.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    123. Re:Slippery slope? by causality · · Score: 1

      Our species survived without fingerprints and DNA testing, but they've done great things for solving crimes. Plate readers and facial recognition cameras will make getting away with crime even more difficult. Wearing latex masks won't fool an intelligent system either that identifies a face with odd infrared or UV coloring and is walking a number of blocks to put distance between an owned or stolen vehicle and the criminals destination.

      While it's only fiction, as Captain Picard said to the holographic Moriarty, "Professor, I feel it necessary to point out that criminal behavior is as unacceptable in the 24th century as it was in the nineteenth - and very much harder to get away with."

      This technology could nearly stop carjackings, burglaries, identify suspects near the scene of arsons, rapes and murders, and catch all those and muggings on camera. We as a society lament spending more on police and dealing with crime than we do on education. Imagine if crime becomes so difficult to get away with, that many criminals give it up? Then we really could spend freed up resources on education, rehabilitation, and job training to turn our society around.

      I don't believe you appreciate that every restriction on freedom and privacy always has the justification of safety. Yes, we can catch more criminals this way. I don't believe anyone is disputing that.

      We could also catch more criminals if 1984-style telescreens were watching everyone at all times. Including in their homes, in the bathroom, in the bedroom, etc. We'd be really safe then!

      At some point you have to decide whether a rational, dispassionate, unbiased observation of our government and the people who run it leads you to believe that they are trustworthy, that they have treated with respect and used wisely the power they already have, that abuses of power are minimal and are punished severely in proportion to the betrayal of trust they represent, that these people have done so well with the power they already have that they have shown it is a good idea to trust them with more. You then have to compare that to how often you have ever been the victim of a car thief or other criminal this system is designed to catch. Honestly, I am much more worried about a nanny-state government than I have ever been afraid of a street criminal. At least I could defend myself against the street criminal, if it came to that. At least I could avoid high-crime areas and otherwise not get the attention of criminals.

      Besides, if you really wanted to reduce crime, the single most effective thing you could do is to legalize all drugs and regulate them the same way we do with alcohol. That would reduce property and violent crime much more than any car-tracking system could ever hope to do.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    124. Re:Slippery slope? by Dantoo · · Score: 1

      Too long to read through all of this.
        I just want to make sure somebody posts the actual reason for spending the money installing these systems. A truly significant amount of staff time in a large shopping centre is taken up each day helping people find their cars. It's costly. In the main, there are two scenarios. Firstly, there are those who park regularly in the same area and then for some reason break their habit. These people usually head for centre management with a cry of "my car has been stolen!" They will insist that their car is gone and something has to be done! Sometimes you can jog their memory with questions such as "which door did you enter the store through" and "which shop did you visit first?" Too often you have all the security staff combing the car parks looking for the lost car. When finally their car is found for them, well if you expect them to be grateful, you'd often be out of luck.

      The second type is the classic little old lady who simply can't remember where she parked and sometimes even if she came in a car at all. Usually they recover after a glass of water and a rest or sometimes a relative has to be called. It's a little sad but it happens every day.

      There is another situation of course. Cars are often stolen from major shopping centres. In fact the numbers are so high that if you aren't in the know you'd probably be shocked. There are security cameras everywhere throughout your shopping mall now. They aren't a lot of use in preventing car theft. You just don't know where/when to look through the massive amount of information recorded. By storing licence plates temporarily into a searchable data base you are able to provide some useful timely assistance to a customer who has genuinely lost their car.

      Shopping centres are not able, legally or otherwise, to connect your licence plate to your name or address or phone number or anything else in this country. Of course if you never lose your car, have never had it stolen, have no fear of having it stolen, you could just avoid using any place that has such a system. If you do lose your car at a shopping mall that doesn't have anything like this, please just quietly join the queue until somebody becomes available to help you find it. Please, no complaints.

    125. Re:Slippery slope? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The cameras are inevitable, and I want to have them on my own property. I want a sensor net that I can use to determine where people and even animals are. I want to be able to play back recordings of events which happened on my property and which are interesting, amusing, or legally significant. I want to know the license plate number of every vehicle that pulls into my driveway and stops at the chain. If I should do some business I want to know who has been at my house so that if they come back to steal from me later I have a list of suspects. And I want to use computer technology to gather the data. Sound like a problem to you? Don't visit me. I may have some or all of this in place now. (All of it is now possible, I don't have all of it of course.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    126. Re:Slippery slope? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      What are you worried about the government setting you up for? Seems to me they already have more powers than they should and if they want to render you to Iraq for interrogation they will. I'm heartened by the pushback against these powers, and also by court victories that are likely to affirm we have the right to videotape police. Abusive police are on the decline and our right and ability to tape them will frustrate and limit those that remain. In general, government corruption in many states is declining.

      I think my chances are much higher that I'll be the victim of ordinary criminals than of the government. Not to mention my chance of being hit by a car. I think in ten years the good, defensive drivers will have wide angle cameras on the dash and out the rear window recording the last five minutes in a loop. Soon enough drivers will have them that many accidents are caught on tape along with plates and faces. Bad drivers will have to shape up or be reported and caught. If the loop is longer, like 30 minutes, police will have an app for smartphones. The app could check every fifteen minutes to see if there's been a police request for video footage from people driving on certain sections of streets where a crime just happened. Then the car cameras could help convict criminals for what they're doing along side the roads. So it's possible the public, wanting to defend themselves and help catch criminals, will set up a surveillance system of its own.

    127. Re:Slippery slope? by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      That was my thought as well when they first presented the system, and claims of "simultaneous identification of up to 8 plates per second" were tossed around.

      At first there really did seem to be a problem with either the database backend doing the lookups or the cameras themselves. You could be fully stopped at the gate and it would be 6-12 seconds before the gate would open. They seemed to fix that after a month or two. Not soon after is when they started mounting the cameras I as I mentioned, and one of these is facing a 4-lane 35 MPH road, so it must be working pretty well.

      The other problem is the way they have the cameras mounted. Because this was fitted onto an existing structure the camera can only see your plate once your car is only about feet away from the gate. This means you're forced to come to almost a full stop (or just slow way down) to give the gate time to come up.

      Since you said you've worked on these systems, can I ask you a question? From looking at the cameras and knowing they work when it's dark, I assume they use infrared light to function. Does that sound right? If that's the case, wouldn't you be able to block them by putting an IR filter over your license plate? Such a filter should be transparent to normal light, so I can't imagine it's (very) illegal in most places.

      Thanks.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    128. Re:Slippery slope? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      What's a parking attendant?

      (haven't seen one in a Westfield mall in Australia since early 2000s)

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    129. Re:Slippery slope? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      a) now.
      b) never.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    130. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence."

      No, it's a sign you are beaten and have forsaken who you are. It's a sign you are weak, unable to convince or change. It's a sign you are sheep.

      "No, no it doesn't, because in and of itself that should not be enough to convict you of anything."

      Says who? We fought a World War where a society did this exactly thing where a certain group in the wrong place or location was made illegal. We still do this to a fraction of our society today (minors with curfew).

      And with adults, maybe not yet. Next time there is a curfew you don't know about, or you're at the wrong location when you're supposed to be somewhere else, you'll be crying otherwise.

      "Also, this is not the police knowing where you are, but a mall knowing where you are."

      Same difference. Police are friendly with cell phone operators, where at least the latter know where you are because you access their tower. You think the mall won't be tied in with police networks in return for favors on mall security and issues? Please. What reality do you live in.

      "It's my property, and I have a right to know what's going on there."

      You're a bloody moron. A business's right to conduct business is limited by the powers of the state in the US, maybe not elsewhere but that makes you backwards for once, and often doesn't override personal liberties. I'm surprised it isn't so elsewhere. While your private, personal property may go by your rules, the same _does not_ apply to business, and despite your statements, it probably doesn't apply to you either as much as you think (you can't shoot someone on your property, you can't film someone using your bathroom on your property). Which is why you can stage protests at a business, conduct campaigns on a Walmart if you wanted, without permission from the property owner. Why press can walk on your property even if it says no trespassing.

      btw, you come off as a real stupid juvenile jackass with your stances. You're honestly making equivalent tracking at a mall, open to the public, to your own private residence? Really? How's that work? You have thousands visiting your residence, have a sign advertising anyone can tramp through your rooms? If not, you knowingly knew the differences between a private residence and a place of business open to the public, and yet tried to make the two equivalent. THAT is reality.

    131. Re:Slippery slope? by rust627 · · Score: 1

      Many people in Australia will be surprised to learn that this has been happening for a while.

      Have you ever noticed the camera's mounted at service stations ? (petrol stations, gas stations choose the term that suits your nationality)

      For the last 5 years or so most of those have been connected to a computer program that ID's the plates and often has a real time connection to a data base (Privately held I believe) containing a list of all the number plates of Vehicles that have driven off without paying for petrol, This Data base is shared with the police department and is updated in real time from all participating servo's (for drive offs), if a 'customer' drives off without paying, data is shared immediately with the local police division.

      The database has (I have been informed) been updated lately to incorporate a section for stolen vehicles and other vehicles that are of interest to police ( all publicly available information ) as many of these vehicles are more likely to 'drive off', and, as a courtesy, if there is a match the police are informed....

      The software was designed and written for a national security/locksmith company and has been rolled out across Australia, with no fuss, no noise, and in most cases installed without even informing the staff at the servo.

      But then, if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear, right ?..............

      --
      da da da dum indeed.
    132. Re:Slippery slope? by AnnaZed · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I have no problem with this.

    133. Re:Slippery slope? by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      I bet you would say something different if your car was stolen and retrieved due to license plate scans. Many people decry the lack of police officers but are unwilling to pay extra taxes to hire more. Then when the police use technology to "force multiply" the privacy issues are brought up.

      Car thieves can be caught using license plate scans. They can also be used to verify alibis when someone is accused of a crime. It does not relieve police of doing their police work as it is impossible for the police to find an individual car. They still have to know who that are looking for, what vehicles they own and they have to put out "be on the lookout" for those vehicles. All the cameras do is add more eyes to the search.

      The police department has no interest in where you go, what you do, who you see or how long you meet with any person until the point at which you are accused of a crime. To me, it is a very egocentric position to take to think that are police officers will be following your every move if license plates are scanned. It takes manpower to read and watch those logs and you just are not that important.

    134. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your car is already tracked in public as you pass traffic cameras (they read every licence plate, not just the speeding ones).

      Relieves police from doing real police work? Data acquisition and analysis is real police work - perhaps one of the most efficient and effective types of police work there is. Having police cars saves police from having to walk everywhere, but you'd hardly say it relieves them from having to do real work - it just makes them faster and more efficient.

      Fortunately here in Australia we don't have the ingrained distrust of authority that Americans do, so we can progress more quickly when it comes to law enforcement effectiveness and uptake of tech like this. Also, we can afford to do it openly, rather than the American method of calling it 'national security' and doing it anyway, just not telling anyone we are.

    135. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

      Give it a rest!

      We already read your plate using vehicle mounted license plate readers while driving and while checking parking lots here in the USA. The fact you may not be aware of that is not an invasion of your privacy. It is acceptable under the law and we use the new technology to enforce the law. The only reason you may not have heard about this is that it is rather expensive to set up each unit and we need a high speed wireless connection.

      But the results are fantastic as we get many hits during each shift. No one has to monitor the camera as it is all done automatically. I can process plates from in front, sides and gong the other way with out even thinking about them. An alarm and details appear on my screen when I get a hit.

      Southern LEO

    136. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      The concept of expectation of privacy is a flawed one. Just because you can't expect privacy, doesn't mean you shouldn't have privacy.

      It basically means that privacy only exists as long as someone doesn't have the means to violate that privacy, and that once that privacy is violated, you no longer can expect it to be private anymore can you?

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    137. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      Your car is already tracked in public as you pass traffic cameras (they read every licence plate, not just the speeding ones).

      Oh, that makes it ok then.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    138. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Nope. Cars have been stolen and recovered, cars have been stolen and never recovered, ever since there have been cars. In fact, I've had a car stolen, and never got it back. It was either stripped then crushed, or just crushed for drug money. Stuff happens.

      And, I've always said that there are TO MANY COPS ALREADY! They don't need force multipliers at all. The only reason for all this added security is "terrorism" paranoia, and government's desire to pry into more and more of ordinary citizen's lives. Government wants to "govern", and they do govern more an more, getting ever more fine grained each decade, and even each year.

      The fact that you may approve of some or all of the more recently passed laws doesn't change the fact that government watches your private life more and more. Seat belt laws, emissions testing laws, drunk driving laws that get ever more stringent, automobile searches, and totally unwarranted tickets by mail are examples - and I've only started with the most obvious laws that affect you and me on the public highways.

      Let me stress - whether you approve of any of the laws is irrelevant to my statement that government is growing ever bigger, and ever more intrusive. There might be 500 "good" laws passed, with the net effect that government grows more intrusive. So, are all those laws, taken together, still good, or not?

      I say, they are not.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    139. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      You are skipping some logic there.

      I'd much rather it be that my Rights could only be violated to such an extent on private property, than my Rights only be valid on private property.

      As it stands, it seems like I NEED to be a billionaire in order to have my Rights and circumvent having them violated by the government. I need a private plane if I want to avoid the TSA and major airport BS. I need to hire a private car not registered in my name not to subject myself to random 'checkpoints'. Doesn't matter if I lose my license for refusal to cooperate since I would have enough money to hire someone else to drive me.

      It looks like you are started out with a good premise, "Shouldn't need to be a billionaire to enjoy your rights", but then decided to shoehorn in a nonsequitor.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    140. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      try shooting someone who invades your home.. it isn't a foregone conclusion that you won't join him in prison

      Very true. My aim isn't what it once was. He might survive.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    141. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      So an infringement on our liberties is ok because it serves your political purposes?

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    142. Re:Slippery slope? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      In what world does someone get a fine every time they fill up their gas tank?

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    143. Re:Slippery slope? by Meski · · Score: 1

      Because technology makes it economically feasible, that's a reason to oppose it?

    144. Re:Slippery slope? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Your being too dense to understand doesn't make my comments non sequitur. Rights aren't rights if anyone can casually take them away, regardless of whether that person is a private individual or a government representative.

      I was, quite appropriately, pointing out that it doesn't matter who takes them away. If you only have rights while standing on land you own, then you don't have rights. They must be combinable. The right to travel doesn't exist if all land is private and you must pay tolls to exercise your rights. The right of privacy doesn't exist if you are tracked 100% of the time. Germany has it figured out. But in the US, the illiterate they vote in government can't read the 9th and 10th Amendments, let alone understand them.

    145. Re:Slippery slope? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Shopping centres are generally (not always, but generally) private property, not public places. So you abide by the rules that the property's owner imposes.

      Yes, there are issues about "are the rules adequately communicated before the contract is accepted by entering the premises?" and such like. But fundamentally, they're private property, even if they are places that the public can, under certain conditions, access.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    146. Re:Slippery slope? by ormondotvos · · Score: 1

      Don't get yer jewels in a jangle, bubba. Richmond california is a much better place due to LPRs (license plate readers) which can read at fifteen miles per hour, and give instant readout of invalid plates due to insurance, theft, or mismatch to car. It requires some car recognition by the driver, since the software doesn't recognize cars yet, but we hear that's also coming. Car theft has dropped dramatically, along with related crimes. We love it. Our area used to be used as a stolen car drop-off area, but now it has gone way down. I understand that the two LPR equipped cruisers can do 20,000 cars a night. I'm sure some geek will point out that's impossible.

    147. Re:Slippery slope? by seekret · · Score: 1

      I disagree, I see it the same as the ability we have to recognize faces and plates.

    148. Re:Slippery slope? by seekret · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone is against having cameras on private property. The resistance is always about cameras in public places, but so long as the streams are available to the public I see no problem with it for the reasons I listed above.

    149. Re:Slippery slope? by Raedwald · · Score: 1

      I'll quote The Register on why it is sad that you don't think there is anything wrong in this:

      Once, we did understand. Twenty-five years ago, Independent science correspondent Steve Connor and I wrote a tome about Britain's Databanks and the effect of growing data processing on civil society. Steve had located Britain's first ever vehicle Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) device, a washing-machine-sized contraption planted on a motorway bridge near St Albans. It heralded the potentially tyrannical ultimate development of a nationwide movement surveillance. We both reached for and proclaimed words from early reviews of data protection laws that had warned that new sensors and new software such as free text retrieval (FTR) raised "new dimensions of unease". A quarter-century on, these words are all but unsayable. The thoughts no longer fit the world.

      --
      Ne mæg werig mod wyrde wiðstondan, ne se hreo hyge helpe gefremman.
    150. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Who should I care if some marketing company knowse that I spent two hours in a shopping centre car park ast Saturday? If I wanterd to do something anonymously there, I wouldn't drive my own car in the first place.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    151. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Parking lots are private property

      I was just going to get to that point.

      LCD smart glass license plate covers are only illegal if you get caught using them on public roads. Hook some up to your car and flip them on once you cross onto private property. Or a little before you do, if you're sure no cops are watching. Then, buy with cash and wear aviator shades inside the mall (to break facial recognition - that'll be the next thing). Then you're shopping anonymously.

      If you want to shop anonymously don't go in your own car. "Borrow" your neighbour's. And make sure you disguise yourself to look as much like him as possible.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    152. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The thing is, you accept that surveillance is acceptable, and normal. Some of us do not.

      The only people who give a rat's toss about public surveillance cameras are criminals, terrorists and the paranoid-delusional..

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    153. Re:Slippery slope? by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      In one of our large parking garages, (7 floors), seniors often forget the floor, and more than that, they don't note the row-aisle number, only the general location.
      The seniors rely on their car key panic thing when they remember how close they were.

      At the elevators there are reminders of the floor, and at the building entrance there is a small pad with tear off sheet and a pen, the drivers want to write a note to themselves. At 70, which I am, I still have a good memory.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    154. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      "Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence."

      So, you advocate the acceptance of terrorist attacks? Internment camps? Mass executions? Genocide?

      Just because something happens, doesn't mean that we need to accept it as the new baseline of "acceptable".

      If you are placing the monitoring of car number plates in a car park with things like terrorism, internment camps and genocide, you are simply providing further evidence of your lack of engagement with reality.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    155. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Yes, because cameras don't sleep, blink, aren't limited to looking at one place at one time, and can be hooked up to facial/license plate recognition databases. Cameras DO make it a bigger problem.

      In the same way, having police dedicated to preventing crime is unfair on criminals, who a few hundred years ago could geneally get away with stuff provided they were fast/strong enough to escape from ad hoc citizens vigilantte groups.
      In fact, I know, let's ban all technology invented in the last ten thousand years, all it's done is encourage governments to oppress us and stifle free trade.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    156. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Your argument is the usual libertarian one that all government is bad in itself, and any increase is even worse, regardless of the reason. The general response to this is "go and love on a desert island then".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    157. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that we should use any technology we have available to improve law enforcement without restriction, privacy issues be damned? In the far future if people could be infected with nanomachines to use them as human surveillance systems would you be OK with that too? Maybe if access is anonymized and the police can only look through another person's eyes and ears in public places?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    158. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Or not use the mall - there's no law stating one must spend a day shopping in a mall.

      What good are rights if you can't exercise them without being a billionaire (the one who owns the mall)? Libertarianism - the push for the return to the good ol' days when rights were restricted to landowners (and only men could own land).

      While I agree about libertarianism, there is no essential human right to be able to shop wherever you want at your convenience and by the mode of transport of your choice.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    159. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Unless you're an autistic savant your face and plate recognition capabilities will be laughable compared to even today's computers. And even then, we wouldn't have a swarm of you stuck to rooves and lampposts all over the place, awake 24/7, operating as a single hive mind.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    160. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is going to be great for divorce proceedings. It would be quite easy to track if 2 people are showing up at a mall at the same time and leaving at about the same time. to meed at a mall restaurant or bar. hell, if there is no limit to the plates you can search then a spouse could easily check if his/her spouse is always going there at the same time as a co-worker.

    161. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Well, you've made a few comments that I disagree with. This one only shows that you're an ass. There's really nothing to disagree with, because it's so asinine.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    162. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There are no retail parks near the Westfield Mall in Shepherd's Bush, London - the largest mall in Europe until their Stratford mall opens on Tuesday. It doesn't have any retail parks nearby either.

      Remind me again of the name of the law that makes it compulsory to shop at either of these two places?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    163. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      In Japan, a valet will cover your number plate for you when you check into a love hotel.

      No, the meme is:
      A valet will cover your number plate for you when you check into a love hotel - IN JAPAN!

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    164. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Doubt it. It probably varies by jurisdiction, but here (northern CA) you can get in trouble for parking on the street with out of date registration tags. Not sure how that translates to parking garages...

      Pariking on the street means your vehicle is on a public road, same as if you were driving. Private property is different.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    165. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious to know how people in the UK feel about the congestion fee toll which also can essentially know when your car was at certain places.

      You'd probably be more curious to know how people in the UK feel about the automatic number plate recognition cameras that are installed all over the country which already essentially know when your car was at certain places, and the data is available in real time to the police.

      And the police will be interested in your car's location at a parcicular time for what other reason than that it might have been involved in a crime? That's right, no other reason at all.

      If you're off doing some armed robbery/terrorist act in your own car with your own number plates and get nabbed by an automatic number plate recognition system, well boo fucking hoo.

      Otherwise, the police aren't really going to be interested in the information that you've been knobing your secretary at her house instead of "working late" every Friday night between 7 and 11 pm.

      Yeah, yeah, slippery slope, soon it will be like the Stasi, Britain's like 1984.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    166. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      try shooting someone who invades your home.. it isn't a foregone conclusion that you won't join him in prison.

      It never has been. You've never been allowed to drag someone in from the street, kill them and then say "because he was in my house I had every right to shoot him in self defence". As always in the law, facts vary, and there is no black and white dividing line between the above (absurd) scenario and the genuine "shooting an armed intruder as you are in fear of your life" scenario.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    167. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Actually, this isn't a public place. You're parking on their property. Don't like it, don't go there. It's that simple.

      Just walk away has always been stupid advice. It doesn't change anything. Why are there always a bunch of dummies who preach this? We should always speak up and protest abusive practices. Following your 'don't go there' advice doesn't improve anything, it just narrows our options and encourages this sort of crap.

      GP didn't say "don't go there, but never explain why to a single living soul" did he? You may persuade others not to go there, write letters to the store or to local politicians, start a facebook petition, etc etc etc.

      but what you shouldn't do is carrry on patronising the place andputting money in their bank if you morally disagree with its policies.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    168. Re:Slippery slope? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      That option only exists when the there is a viable alternative. Once all private sites are using tracking, where does one go? There are much easier ways to let people find their vehicles that don't lead to privacy concerns; e.g. paint memorable pictures over the walls at various point "Oh yeah, we were just to the left of that giraffe on level 3"

      Welcome to Idiocracy. There's no possible way I can remember something complicated like 3E, but I can smile like a baby when I see a fucking giraffe.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    169. Re:Slippery slope? by Twanfox · · Score: 1

      Does that mean you don't have any right to life since someone can casually take it away from you at any time? What rights do you suppose exist then, since even the most basic of things can be taken away from you?

      Rights aren't something that can't be taken away from you. Rights are things that we consider what Should Be. They're a construct for us, to establish a framework upon which we can live our lives with expectations that don't involve looking over our shoulder like animals every day.

    170. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really so naive?

      Of course, the police as an organisation aren't officially interested unless a crime has been committed.. but as soon as the data is available and accessible, there are people at the police, or at the council, or in various parts of the government, or people with friends who have access, or people who have money to pay people with access, or people who are exploiting those who have access. And some of those people will be interested to find that you are driving away from your house and will be unlikely to return for several hours.. and some may be interested to insert data into the system that makes it look like you were driving along a specific road and stopped for a couple of hours between checkpoints. Good luck, when the database is treated as more reliable than your own word and the computer says you must have done something. How ELSE could that body have got there? Yours was the only vehicle that night..

      You really think this won't be happening? You must have a very high opinion of people.. and of course, its impossible to game the system, right?

      right

    171. Re:Slippery slope? by seekret · · Score: 1

      You don't understand, I'm saying that it doesn't matter that a computer can store it forever. Last time I checked I could take a picture of anyone and anything I wanted in public places. It's the same concept as photography or human sight, just that video cameras are more efficient.

    172. Re:Slippery slope? by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      Let me put this into middle-class language for you: If you can't afford a $1000 fine, how can you afford $1700 in rent?*

      Except that rent is a constant, fixed, paid every month cost... Fuel on the other hand is something that quite frankly, I don't know a single person who can't cut back on. Parking fines are such small amounts that honestly, if you can't pay one, you're doing it very very wrong.

      And yes, many people do live paycheck to paycheck –that doesn't make it a sensible thing to do ;)

    173. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your second point is easily solved: don't park in their deck. You can always park in the lot of one of those little strip shopping centers that always surround malls, and simply walk across the street. Consider it as an opt-out.

      and then get your car towed..

    174. Re:Slippery slope? by causality · · Score: 1

      What are you worried about the government setting you up for? Seems to me they already have more powers than they should and if they want to render you to Iraq for interrogation they will. I'm heartened by the pushback against these powers, and also by court victories that are likely to affirm we have the right to videotape police. Abusive police are on the decline and our right and ability to tape them will frustrate and limit those that remain. In general, government corruption in many states is declining.

      I think my chances are much higher that I'll be the victim of ordinary criminals than of the government. Not to mention my chance of being hit by a car. I think in ten years the good, defensive drivers will have wide angle cameras on the dash and out the rear window recording the last five minutes in a loop. Soon enough drivers will have them that many accidents are caught on tape along with plates and faces. Bad drivers will have to shape up or be reported and caught. If the loop is longer, like 30 minutes, police will have an app for smartphones. The app could check every fifteen minutes to see if there's been a police request for video footage from people driving on certain sections of streets where a crime just happened. Then the car cameras could help convict criminals for what they're doing along side the roads. So it's possible the public, wanting to defend themselves and help catch criminals, will set up a surveillance system of its own.

      By suggesting that the public and not the government would run a makeshift surveillance system, you are implicitly admitting that this is better than the government doing so for all of the reasons (re: power) I have already outlined. You are trying to say it without saying it that your original position was quite far from ideal.

      Another big difference between your private dash-cam and a government-monitored surveillance system is key: you probably aren't going to forever archive and store and data-mine the five minutes of video you record. You probably don't have a state-sized budget to throw at storing all the data, building databases around it, and you probably can't link that yourself with the DMV records to identify who owns which license plate. You probably aren't going to feel tempted to sell this massive archive of everyone's comings and goings and identities to marketers. You probably won't go on fishing expeditions.

      Yet another important difference: you probably won't send your five-minute-loop video to anyone until and unless you are materially wronged in some way, for example maybe by a hit-and-run driver. Then and only then is there a reason for the authorities to peruse said video. Oh, you almost certainly won't be looking to bust people for adminsitrative violations and victimless crimes like the government would love to do because these are a steady revenue stream for state budgets. You personally have no such incentive.

      Like I said, by suddenly changing your position concerning who would run a system, the nature of that system, and what it would be used for, you are saying it without saying it. You are admitting that your support of novel methods of government monitoring of private citizens is ill-founded. Perhaps you thought doing it subtly would save face? Nah. I have more respect for someone who comes out and straight-up says they have reconsidered.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    175. Re:Slippery slope? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Sorry but you misunderstand my point. The dash-cam network won't be as effective at catching and also at deterring crime for the reasons you identified. I brought it up to point out it's coming. That degree of privacy will be lost anyway. I hope when the police system shows a crime just happened, that people will upload or set their dash system to automatically upload what it saw driving through the area. I'm still in favor of a government system that works better. Also if the system starts sending out tickets for breaking the average speed limit like in Britain, unlike there, Californians can and will pass a proposition that raises the speed limits five or ten miles per hour. I can't help it if other states fail to change their government.

      So again, if the government knows where you are and guesses what you're doing, how is that going to harm you compared to how the government can already cause you harm?

    176. Re:Slippery slope? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So you think that it should be just fine for places to refuse service to black people?

    177. Re:Slippery slope? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Rights aren't something that can't be taken away from you.

      Rights are what *can't* be taken from you. Someone who casually kills you takes you life, but not your right to life. Granted, it isn't much use to have rights you are unable to exercise, which was my initial point with regards to the irrelevancy of who is infringing on your rights.

    178. Re:Slippery slope? by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      What part of "Not sure how that translates to parking garages" didn't you get? Did you entirely miss the part where billstewart said "Parking cars on the street without current registration is no different legally from driving them on the street, just easier to catch."? What are you trying to say that he didn't already? What's your point?

      Besides, there are all kinds of laws that come into play on private property when there is open public access (stores, restaurants, etc) (think nudity, intoxication, etc). In order to get your car to the parking garage, you had to drive it, didn't you? How many people do you know tow their car to a parking garage and then tow it away again? There could easily be grounds to ticket such a vehicle because it was on the public roads.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
    179. Re:Slippery slope? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Chances are they simply use a monochrome CCD; such cameras are sensitive to IR, so IR illumination works at night. During the day, they'll pick up regular light as well, though, and even at night the illumination on your license plate ought to be enough for them to detect it some of the time.

    180. Re:Slippery slope? by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

      Ah, that makes sense. So, I suppose you might blind the camera day and night by putting high intensity IR LEDs around your license plate?

      Unfortunately, I imagine driving anywhere off-campus with either of these in place is probably against the law.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
  2. great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another reason to stay away from the mall... lol

    1. Re:great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen. I live a couple blocks from one of the largest malls in the world, and I've avoided it for years. Yay for Amazon (w/Prime).

  3. what is the over/under for # years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    before this type of data is used in a divorce proceeding, e.g. litigant's car was placed at a nightclub, strip club or casino on the following dates

  4. Anyone see anything wrong with this...? by DeusExInfernus · · Score: 0

    Westfield said police could also use it to find stolen or unregistered vehicles. In other news those cameras have appeared bloody everywhere, and their servers have just been hacked by everyone ever. Problem? [insert troll-face here, etc]

  5. Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My secret private license plate information that is on the front and back of my car, and which it is illegal to obfuscate, conceal, or otherwise make harder to read.

    And they're going to use CAMERAS to look for them! Why next they'll have satellites keeping an eye on the weather!

    1. Re:Oh no! by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      A needle in a hay stack is used as a metaphor for a reason. A needle is very well hidden in a haystack because it is one small item in a very large pool of other material. That makes it hard to find. The claim that we have no privacy in public is absolutely false. There is also another common, accepted saying. "Lost in the crowd".

    2. Re:Oh no! by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Just because there's a technology which winds back the ability to be "lost in the crowd" doesn't mean that you have/had an automatic assumption to privacy. It's like saying that the police shouldn't be able to track a fugitive on the run logging in to his facebook account because that technology to find someone 2 states away didn't exist when we first established the FBI.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  6. Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 2

    1. At least remember what vague part of the lot you parked in. That will help.

    2. (to actually be done before step 1) Purchase and place one of those antenna ball things, a fairly uncommon one in a striking color (yellow, orange, or neon pink all work well), and look for that.

    Assuming you didn't park next to a van or an H2, that thing should stick out like a sore thumb.

    My wife's old car had a bright yellow winnie-the-pooh antenna ball and that thing was always easy to spot no matter how crowded the lot.

    1. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. At least remember what vague part of the lot you parked in. That will help.

      2. (to actually be done before step 1) Purchase and place one of those antenna ball things, a fairly uncommon one in a striking color (yellow, orange, or neon pink all work well), and look for that.

      Assuming you didn't park next to a van or an H2, that thing should stick out like a sore thumb.

      My wife's old car had a bright yellow winnie-the-pooh antenna ball and that thing was always easy to spot no matter how crowded the lot.

      And your local DMV has you covered. With new weekend service, you can come down whenever it's convenient to turn in your man card!

    2. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mall I most frequently visit, due to its proximity to my home, is the largest shopping mall in North America (and seventh largest in the world), and yet I've never found it at all difficult to find my car simply by remembering where I parked it.

      Is this really that big of a problem? How dumb are people?

    3. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by bendy · · Score: 1

      You forgot step 0.

      0. Own a car that's at least 20 years old and doesn't have a power antenna that retracts automatically when the car is turned off.....

    4. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but that will be solved with step 0.1: Wait until said car is about 4 or 5 years old at which point the power antenna breaks and no longer retracts more than about 1/3 of the way, like my 98 Trans Am.

    5. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

      Uh, my cars over 30 years old and has the antenna built into the windshield you insensitive clod.

      Instead it is pale yellow (original paint), making it almost impossible to lose, barring the occasional SUV invasion.

    6. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, are you unaware of the bell curve? You should expect that 50% of all people are of below-average intelligence! The fact that you don't seem to know this indicates that you may be among that population yourself.

      dom

    7. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

      2. (to actually be done before step 1) Purchase and place one of those antenna ball things, a fairly uncommon one in a striking color (yellow, orange, or neon pink all work well), and look for that.

      This is a great idea, and I hope everyone follows your advice.

      Everyone.

    8. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by artor3 · · Score: 2

      The fact that you seem to think that 50% of a population must be below average says more about your (lack of) knowledge about statistics than anything else.

    9. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by nospam007 · · Score: 2

      "...I've never found it at all difficult to find my car simply by remembering where I parked it.

      People owning a smartphone to use their app can as well just take a picture of the lot/row/deck number.
      This investment ain't for helping the customer, that's for sure.

    10. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Neon pink? I'll stick to a manly color and pattern, like camoflage. Wait a minute...

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    11. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have tattooed a car tattoo on my car. And on that tattoo is a tattoo of the car with the car tattoo on it. Needless to say, I can't find my car unless I am drunk.

    12. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I always just mash the "panic" button on the key fob while standing in the middle of the parking lot and listen which direction the siren comes from. Doesn't anyone else do this?

    13. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You apparently have not been to mall of America. *HUGE* parking lots.

    14. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 0

      Doesn't have to be neon pink. I've got a Steelers one (no, I don't live in Pittsburgh!).

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    15. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      it doesn't have to be flourescent green. I have Steelers one (and no I don't live in Pittsburgh!).

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    16. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, somehow, despite having visited The Mall countless times, I've never managed to forget my parking spot. Maybe it's because I'm not a fucking idiot.

    17. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI - 2011 - 1998 > 5

      (http://www.google.co.nz/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=2011-1998 if you'd like to check my maths)

    18. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Just get a amateur radio liscense and set up a mobile HF rig with a giant 9 foot antenna festooned with strange looking wires and metal bits. Aside from scaring the crap out of anyone in a 500 yard radius when the antenna hits a low overhang, it's visible for miles.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    19. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      The internal topology of Westfield Doncaster is such a mess that I couldn't demonstrate that it conforms to assumptions made about other parts of our universe. A navigation system would be a great boon. Incidentally a friend of mine does iphone development for a company which sells software to westfield.

    20. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anyd · · Score: 1

      I concur... I work in a city of ~30,000 and park in public parking every day. Depending on the daily traffic & parking situation (it's a college town, game days bring in an extra 100,000+ people) I can park anywhere in a 2 mile radius containing thousands of parking spots. Me and hundreds of other restaurant workers (admittedly not the brightest bunch) find our cars every day.

      Make an effort people. Your car is probably your 1st or 2nd most valuable possession. Write it on your hand if you need to... it's not that hard.

    21. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have my solution to finding my car in a parking lot. I don't own a car. Amazing the time I save not looking for it, or for parking space for that matter.

    22. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You apparently have not been to mall of America. *HUGE* parking lots.

      I went to West Edmonton Mall today (bigger than Mall of America). I parked in row 6-K, near the Bourbon Street entrance at ground level. It's really not that hard to remember that sort of thing. If you're not familiar with the mall, get one of the maps that they provide near most entrances and put a big X near where you parked.

    23. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... Then I'm going to find my car more easily, as it will be the only one without a fluorescent ball on the antenna...LOL

  7. Westfield not just in Australia by molo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Westfield also operates dozens of malls in the US and a number in New Zealand as well. See this list on wikipedia.

    -molo

    --
    Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
    1. Re:Westfield not just in Australia by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Hence the title "Global Mall Operator..."

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    2. Re:Westfield not just in Australia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Repeating your username at the bottom of your post when it's already at the top of your post is just plain narcissistic. Either that or you're stuck in 1985.

  8. This is not news by Dan+B. · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While the iDevice app maybe new, the camera-in-car-park scenario has been operating in at least one place that I know (and use) quite frequently; Brisbane Airport.

    When you drive in, it images and OCRs your plate at the boom-gate, printing your rego on the ticket. Each car park has a camera pointed at it with a large multi colour light that reads - Red; park occupied, Green; park vacant, and Blue; park about to be vacated. When you pay for/validate your ticket, the light above your car goes from red to blue, and as soon as you pull out, it flicks to green.

    I'm all for this tech, it makes park hunting so much easier, plus you would be amazed at the number of stolen cars that are stolen for the express purpose of the criminal driving it to their destination (such as the airport or shopping centre) with no intention of doing anything with the car other than avoiding a taxi fare. Thousands of stolen cars are recovered from parking lots each year, undamaged and usually, unlocked!

    --
    Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect
    1. Re:This is not news by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      that convenience > abuse potential attitude will end up enslaving us all, a little bit at a time..

    2. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does this enslave you?! Are you completely paranoid?!

      "Oh no! Someone knows I went to the mall!" Well most people aren't Aspie weirdos like you. Most people are happy to interact with other human beings and live in a society. If you hate life so much then you should kill yourself.

    3. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and the really cool part is that, as the red/green lights are visible from the road, the parking station looks like a large, rectangular Christmas tree.
      One question though... If the camera is at the boom gate at the entrance, how does the system know which space your car is occupying and hence, which car space is about to be vacated? It must be using extra cameras to track your vehicle to the individual car space you occupy. No wonder the airport parking is so expensive.

    4. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing: My brother had a cloth-top VW convertible, and one of the rules was that you never locked it: The criminal would just knife the roof to get in, and the top was far more expensive to fix than anything in the car was worth. So he never locked it.

      Then one day, he came back to find it locked. Someone had climbed in, rifled around, swiped his toll booth and parking meter money, and on their way out of the car, locked it behind them...

      AC

    5. Re:This is not news by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      Paid on street parking now uses a detector embedded in the road to sense a vehicle. In a one hour spot it will send a message for a parking inspector after an hour. Maybe the same sort of sensor detects occupied spaces.

    6. Re:This is not news by zoloto · · Score: 2

      Wow, you're totally clueless. How about this: It's no ones damned business where I go or what I do or purchase. That information shouldn't be stored, archived, collected and perused through.

    7. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you're totally clueless. How about this: It's no ones damned business where I go or what I do or purchase. That information shouldn't be stored, archived, collected and perused through.

      I'd be more worried about my credit card company than an automated mall parking lot. Unless you pay for everything in cash, in which case excuse my presumption (and perhaps you need therapy for your paranoia).

    8. Re:This is not news by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I follow the same rule with my Samurai. Heck the back is open almost all the time so you can just climb in and help yourself.

      You can steal a pair of sunglasses, a rusty mud-encrusted lug tool, a quart of motor oil, a rusty screwdriver and a milk crate with some random junk in it.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  9. Thanks for the tip. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm thinking if you're too irresponsible to remember where you left one of your most valuable possessions that you are also too irresponsible to be trusted with the use of that possession.

    1. Re:Thanks for the tip. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You have Asperger's syndrome.

    2. Re:Thanks for the tip. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      True. I have a horrible memory and I've never forgotten at least the general area where I've parked any of my cars. And both of my cars are small and easily obscured.

      Even if you're a billionaire driving a crapcan, the inconvenience of having to wait for Jeeves to bring the limo around should be enough motivation to remember where you parked.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  10. There's an app for that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A follow up app was launched called "Find My Cheating Wife". The new app was soon followed with "Find My Drunken Husband". These $1 apps were soon followed with the slightly more expensive "Block My Souse's App". A real bargain at a $1,000.

    1. Re:There's an app for that by monkyyy · · Score: 0

      i think u only need ur plates visible on public roods, otherwise having a unregistered car that never leaves ur property would have to be illegal, so i'd expect ppl modding their cars, or finding type and paper

      --
      warning pointless sig
    2. Re:There's an app for that by PPH · · Score: 2

      A follow up app was launched called "Find My Cheating Wife".

      No need. I know right where your cheating wife is.

      P.S. Now there's two of you telling me to "Slow Down Cowboy!"

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  11. No Public Expectation of Privacy by walkerp1 · · Score: 1

    How about an expectation of Mind Your Own Business? Does that work for you?

    1. Re:No Public Expectation of Privacy by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

      How about an expectation of Mind Your Own Business? Does that work for you?

      I think parking in a parking lot of a mall they own, a mall designed for doing business, counts as part of their business.

    2. Re:No Public Expectation of Privacy by walkerp1 · · Score: 1

      I think patronizing a mall they own is sufficient recompense for the burden of my presence. If you see me at the mall, that's fine. Don't go telling perfect strangers that you saw me there at exactly x time.

  12. Do they keep records? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I didn't read the article, but here's my opinion anyway. It's only a slippery slope if they keep a record after the car has left. If I could enter and leave without any lasting record, I'm cool with it. You could still check for stolen cars that are currently parked there. Or if there was a list of stolen cars, and one showed up, alert the police. That'd be cool.

    But if someone could plug in my license plate and see the last time I was there, that's not cool.

  13. This is fool proof... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until the fools begins switching license plates. When was the last time you checked to see if your license plate was still YOUR license plate?

  14. Slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's an EXTREMELY slippery slope. Once the commercial vendor starts collecting this data under the guise of "something useful", it will undoubtedly be perverted into other uses, most invasive by the Government, lawyers on fishing expeditions, etc.

    Just like those inane "discount cards" in grocery stores and ezPass/iPass tollway transponders have been perverted from their original uses.

    Any mall that implements this asinine invasion of my privacy doesn't get any of my business. I'll just order MORE from online sources. If they all implement something in my area, I'll walk.

    Say NO to this. Whack this camel's nose so it doesn't wreck the tent...

  15. More parking lots need to use a grid system by intellitech · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why more parking lots aren't setup with a decent grid system and signage. If you can't remember or be bothered to know the few characters needed to describe the location of your car, you deserve to be lost. I think the problem is too many people rely on landmarks, which change frequently in a parking lot (because they're mostly cars), and leave it to a retail industry to overthink a problem with an elaborate, unnecessary solution. Sure, convenience factor, but still, as the summary put it, it's a slippery slope.

    --
    vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
    1. Re:More parking lots need to use a grid system by deniable · · Score: 1

      Most of them aren't well organised to begin with so labeling is a problem. Throw in a couple of extensions to add more shops and an additonal deck or two and you get the nightmare we have now. I'd love to see a nice labelled map but I doubt it will happen.

  16. Criminals can get a five finger discount by millsey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Use the app at the touch of your fingertips to see if your neighbor is out and take what you want!

    1. Re:Criminals can get a five finger discount by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...because looking out the window to see if your neighbor is out is so much harder to do.

    2. Re:Criminals can get a five finger discount by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Our car is in a garage with a roller door. The house looks much the same when we are out. It makes the house much more secure.

    3. Re:Criminals can get a five finger discount by wdef · · Score: 1

      Looking our your window to see if several hundred neighbors/victims are in or out is definitely harder. They can cherry pick victims with this app and not just for robbery.

    4. Re:Criminals can get a five finger discount by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to looking out your front window and seeing if said car is in the driveway?

    5. Re:Criminals can get a five finger discount by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like with the Twitter and Facebook feeds.

      Twitter - "Having great time in this week"

      Ohh, so my neighbor is out of town and since he lives alone the home is wide open. Time to go rob all his stuff and pawn it. No worries, Insurance will pay for it.

  17. Private company can't connect plate with owner by schwit1 · · Score: 2

    As I read it the mall folks have no access to owner data. This makes the data little different than tracking make/model/color/year. My question is how long do they keep the tag data?

    1. Re:Private company can't connect plate with owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Registration details can be had for a very low price these days.
      When I call up the local auto-store they ask for my number plate instead of make/model/engine number. They've already bought a detailed copy of all rego data.

    2. Re:Private company can't connect plate with owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in London and they are about to open a new mall in the next days in East London. I have seen some advertising just about the number plate recognition and that they will give bonus points/special discounts for frequent and loyal visitors. So somehow there will be a connection at one point. I can only suspect that it is going to be voluntarily for the car owner to sign up, but hey, let's face it, Joe Bloggs does not share the concers or does not even think as far as us /. crowd do.

    3. Re:Private company can't connect plate with owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mall folks have access to your license plates data, they can track you with your cell phone signals...

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/08/05/18/1838222/Shopping-Centers-Track-Customers-Via-Cell-Phone-Signals

      http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/bluetooth-surveillance2.htm

      and they do have readily available personal information if you use a credit card to make purchases. With a little simple data correlation my bet is that they know exactly who you are, where you went, and what you drive by the end of your shopping day.

  18. It is already being done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Most airports have these systems on trucks and drive thru their lots, as they are almost always a County agency there is nothing stoppin them from working with the sheriff to do the same thing. They currently do this to help you find your car nd look for abandoned vehicles.

    Many state agencies are adding this system to their State Highway patrols to scan plates as they drive and look for BOLO's and Reg Issues.

  19. The biggest problem is not privacy related by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    While everyone goes on about loss of privacy, the biggest problem I see is this:

    If you cannot generally remember where you put your car, how are you going to remember the random cryptic string of digits that is your license plate to look up your car on this system?

    For better or worse, it does seem like the system may be much more helpful to police than visitors.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:The biggest problem is not privacy related by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      If you cannot generally remember where you put your car, how are you going to remember the random cryptic string of digits that is your license plate to look up your car on this system?

      You're asking how can you remember something that's always constant when you occasionally forget something that's always variable?

      Do you know when your birthday is? Do you know what day of the week it fell on in 1993?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:The biggest problem is not privacy related by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would imagine if it's an app you would just have to input your license plate once and it will be stored. That said, a bigger issue would seem to be the tracking ability afforded with this, e.g., boyfriend/girlfriend, significant other, parent, etc. wants to track & find out if you're at the mall at a given time, they can do so from anywhere.

    3. Re:The biggest problem is not privacy related by goingToSay · · Score: 1

      The plate number could be stored on the phone if the app doesn't do it already.

  20. Please! No! by PPH · · Score: 1

    We hide grandpa's Cadillac for a reason.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  21. Crowdsource it by witherstaff · · Score: 1

    I'm actually surprised there is no android/iphone app that lets you put your phone on the dash and it snaps license plates as you drive. Why should big brother be in the hands of big brother? Let's crowdsource it and figure out where all federal plates, state plates, police, etc are on a regular basis. Altho it would be a stalker's dream app but if the feds are watching us, let's watch back.

    1. Re:Crowdsource it by wdef · · Score: 1

      I suspect that Apple would reject such an app. They won't allow the breath testing or speeding cop locator apps in the App Store will they?

  22. Local laws? by Karljohan · · Score: 1

    I hope they follow local laws. They are not in Sweden as far as I know but because of our history of registering a lot about people we have strikt laws about what you may register and this is not legal here.

  23. I have a great idea. by Nyder · · Score: 1

    Since we are talking iPhones here, I think they all have gps's in them.

    You could have an app that records where you left your car at. Either by pressing a button that says something like "Remember this location", so later, you can use the same app to find your way back to that location.

    For the lazy, you could have it keep track of where you are, and where you been at all times, so you can retrace your steps even easier.

    but no, the best solution is probably spending billions of dollars on special license plate reading cameras and whatever you use to control them. After all, no one would abuse such power.

    --
    Be seeing you...
    1. Re:I have a great idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck getting accruate location data in a covered/multi level carpark.
      "You left your car here: +/- 500m lat/long and +/- 1000m altitude"
      Or basically, somewhere in the mall you're shopping at, or maybe accross the street... or even a block away

    2. Re:I have a great idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just how is this going to work in an underground car park where GPS can't reach?
      Westfield - London Shepherd Bush only has underground parking.

      Doh!

    3. Re:I have a great idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPS doesn't work in most carparks. In my experience, you need to be able to see the sky for GPS to work.

    4. Re:I have a great idea. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Not only that, it does freaky stuff between tall buildings. If you're walking down a street between tall buildings the GPS might even say you're going in the opposite direction that you actually are because the signal's bouncing off a tall building.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  24. there is no liberty which people are unwilling to by cats-paw · · Score: 1

    sacrifice for convenience.

    Oh, wait, people gave up the 4th amendment at airports and it's now much less convenient.

    Curious creatures people are.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
  25. Government? What government? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    The real potential for abuse is the same as with online stores -- tweaking prices depending on customer's expected willingness to pay them.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  26. Re:there is no liberty which people are unwilling by Plombo · · Score: 1

    People didn't give that up. Congress gave it up for us, and people vote based on other issues.

  27. They already do this with police officers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no slippery slope here. Mall parking lots are already scoured over by police looking for expired tags and other ticket-able offences.

    Once again nerds go off the libertarian deep end.

  28. Not News, Welcome to the UK 2001 by Kr3m3Puff · · Score: 4, Informative

    Number plate reading cameras in public car parks have been around in the UK for a number of years and the government hands for even longer. Any time spent in London your vehicle will be scanned both publicly and privately. A visit to almost any airport in the UK will result in that and Heathrow Airport has had the "find my car" stuff for quite a while.

    If it is a slippery slope, it is one that is already been in the wild for a long long time. Time to go tilt at some other windmills.

    --
    D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
    1. Re:Not News, Welcome to the UK 2001 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems like you're reinforcing the slippery-slope argument, intended or not.

      Many people consider the UK a surveillance state, Brits included. If this started in 2001 and the prevailing situation is so much more advanced (worse) now, it doesn't seem too far fetched that you're well on your way down the slippery slope. If/how this point eludes you is unclear.

  29. Re:there is no liberty which people are unwilling by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Which liberty is being sacrificed in this particular case?

  30. You folks have no idea what you're getting into by Whuffo · · Score: 1

    Each time you let a corporation or the government have information about what you do or where you go, you're building the fascist society that you so vehemently deny is coming.

    You may have no problem today with having someone else know that you parked in spot a-33 at the mall at 4:33, then you bought dinner for two at the Cheesecake Factory (per your debit / credit) card, then left the parking lot at 5.24. You arrived at the No-tell-hotel at 6:12 and checked into room 163 with your friend and spent 1.2 hours there.

    Here's the thing that you never consider: the only reason that law enforcement collects information is to further an investigation. If some hooker bought it at the No-tell-hotel at 6:30, you'll be one of the prime suspects. If someone who stayed there on that day is busted for possession, they'll be coming to ask you a few questions.

    This stuff doesn't make the law enforcement people smarter, it just makes them lazier. They can look at all of the nifty data and find someone to pin the crime on without ever setting their donut down.

    Sure, quote that line about "if you've done nothing wrong then you've got nothing to worry about". And then consider that what you think is wrong and what someone else thinks is wrong (MADD for example) are two very different things. Maybe your parking data will show up in a criminal trial; maybe it'll show up in your divorce proceedings. But rest assured, it'll never show up in any place where it does YOU any good.

    1. Re:You folks have no idea what you're getting into by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Isn't MADD a bad example? Sure they want to make driving with any BAC illegal, but they don't have have the support for it. But if someone's driving is impaired causes a problem or worse, shouldn't they be held accountable for it? In a divorce case, if one party has been adulterous, aren't they typically at fault for it?

      Defense attorneys create reasonable doubt all the time. I see no reason why they won't still be able to do so here. What I do know is with enough plate and facial recognition cameras, crime will plummet when criminals can't get away with it. That frees up resources to once again spend more on education than on crime.

  31. Bad and useless app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scanning the license plates isn't needed.The iPhone already knows your location so just with one click you should be able to save your car location.

    This license plates scanning idea is pure for data mining.

  32. re: cars and privacy expectations by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    I'm not claiming there's no legitimate reason for the public to want to track a vehicle.... but honestly, that's probably one of the best (only?) really solid arguments for demanding license plates on them. Without plates as unique identifiers, it's difficult to determine exactly which vehicle was used in a crime committed against you. If you say "A guy driving a late model blue Ford truck ran me off the road and drove off!" or what-not, that's not really good enough. And obviously, the VIN number isn't practical for this purpose either.

    But yes, I *do* consider my car a personal possession. It certainly isn't public or state property! The only reason government really has any special reason to get involved with aspects of my vehicle ownership at all is because they built and maintain the road infrastructure most of us (including me) operate our vehicles on. Other than that, they should treat it like any other purchase I make.... Collect the same sales tax as they would any other time, but leave it alone after that.

    The problems I have with what Westfield is doing aren't necessarily legal in nature. I think if they own the cameras and computers and they operate them on their own private property, plus they inform customers that they're in place? They're legally in the clear. But clearly, they're using technology that was never even considered as a possibility when license plates were first conceived -- and it's an implementation that some customers may not be comfortable with. I'd certainly think twice about parking in their garage if they start this at my local Westfield shopping plazas. The fact that it conveniently helps me locate my car is a small benefit, but as others have pointed out? There's a lot of potential for this information to be logged and cross-analyzed to provide marketing information I didn't agree to or get fairly compensated for providing.

    Let me ask you this: How would you feel if every time you drove into a mall, some guy appeared with a clipboard and jotted down info including exactly where you parked in relation to their store entrances, the time/date you parked, and the type of vehicle you drove ... and THEN appeared again as you were leaving to note what you were carrying to your vehicle, how long you took to load it up and leave the parking space, and again, a time/date stamp of exactly when that was? This is just an automated version of the same, really (with some of the details only extractable if they want to review the camera footage).

  33. Old news: UK already tracks plates by wdef · · Score: 2
    You other Western countries are so behind in Orwellian surveillance. As usual, the UK has already been doing it:

    The UK has an extensive automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) CCTV network. Police and security services use it to track UK vehicle movements in real time. The resulting data are stored for 5 years in the National ANPR Data Centre to be analyzed for intelligence and to be used as evidence.[1]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police-enforced_ANPR_in_the_UK

    The United Kingdom: Orwell got the year wrong.

    1. Re:Old news: UK already tracks plates by dakameleon · · Score: 2

      This, and the fact that toll roads and petrol pumps ("gas stations") have had this kind of technology for years means this should be a total non-story. The only innovation is that they're admitting the police might use the data.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  34. Slippery slopes, indeed. by taustin · · Score: 1

    If the world of crime were static and unchanging, this would be a damning indictment of the misuse of modern technology. But it's not; criminals use new technology to become more efficient at committing crime.

    To complain about the police using new technology to keep pace with criminals seems, to me, a far more dangerous slippery slope.

    1. Re:Slippery slopes, indeed. by wdef · · Score: 1

      But this example is not a tech race between criminals and police. If the network of plate-reading cameras and the app did not exist in the first place, neither criminals nor cops could (ab)use it.

  35. Re:there is no liberty which people are unwilling by wdef · · Score: 1
    I don't want to have Godwin's Law invoked on me so I can't be more specific, but there are astonishing quotes from certain folk in a certain big war mid-20C about how to get a stupid populace to give up freedom. Modern governments have clearly studied these. Familiar themes include:

    you can do anything in the name of the children

    keep the populace fearful of a common enemy and they will do your bidding to be safe

    etc etc

  36. Hey this is a great way to attract Hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    be a good place to put a honeypot.

  37. But anyone can get the data? Free surveillance!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't mind the owner of the mall knowing my license plate and storing those details - and begrudgingly i will allow video inspection in the interest of lower prices - but dissemination license plate to location data on the general public is going one step way too far. Who knows who can be out there using that information... housebreakers? ex girlfriends?

  38. The prime purpose of mall NPR cameras... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is to identify times of entry/exit and thus be able to "fine" vehicles that overstay arbitrarily imposed parking limits. I don't know about the US, but in the UK its common to find that Supermarkets/Shopping Centres (aka malls) farm out their car parks to organisations like Parking Eye who are able to retrieve ownership details from the Driver and Vehicle Licencing Authority and thus send threatening notices, that look remarkably like police penalty charge notices, demanding payment for the car owners "parking offence".

    The iPhone app is just a way to divert attention from the real revenue-raising purpose of mall NPR cameras.

  39. SOURCE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cut the bull please.
    Anyone have any sourcecode?

  40. Information about Westfield Bondi Junction by lewko · · Score: 1

    As someone who spends more than a few hours a week at Westfield's Bondi Junction centre, I can tell you more about it.

    1) The technology is from this company and the technology is already in use (in varying forms) at US malls. It's primary purpose is to help people find a parking spot quicker and for that it works *very* well.

    2) A downside of the system is that it doesn't seem to record imagery from all the cameras, besides the number-plate data. A friend had her car damaged in the parking lot and was unable to find any camera footage to assist.

    3) Yes, it helps you find your car (or anyone else's).

    4) It also stops people taking advantage of the free 2 hour parking by exiting the carpark and re-entering. Although they have not enabled this yet, it's expected that the second time you drive in after expending your free 2 hour ration, you'll be charged for time on-site.

    My biggest fear about ANPR cameras, is when local government start using it for parking enforcement and riots break out which will make the LA and London riots look like a playground scuffle. The companies who sell this stuff will have the blood of parking officers on their hands...

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  41. It's inevitabe. Get used to it. by Mr0bvious · · Score: 1

    License plate reading cameras, facial recognition and other tracking devices are going to happen, they will be everywhere. Well they pretty much are everywhere already.

    But the sooner we get this 'oh my privacy' all over and done with, the sooner we'll learn to live with it.

    --
    Never happened. True story.
  42. Successful - ? by tchdab1 · · Score: 1

    How do they define a successful trial - one where no one litigates?

  43. Useless smartphone app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It surprises me that nobody has pointed out yet that there are dozens of smartphone apps already that do exactly this- help you find back your car.
    What's more, none of the "find my carr" apps are mall-dependent app nor require the mall to set up an array of cameras, and thus they're vastly superior to the system proposed by the Westfield group. Logically, if the Westfield group claim they aren't aware of those alternative apps, they've either been living under a rock or are lying, which in turn implies ulterior motives (said "slippery slope"). My money is on the latter.

  44. Shopping Mall Surveillance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't shopping malls going the way of the dinosaur? Just shop online and fuck paying the extra costs and dealing with the 1984-esque feel of going to the mall.

    1. Re:Shopping Mall Surveillance? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Shop online using a traceable credit card on a web site that tracks users? Oh yeah that's way better for privacy.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  45. The mall tracking your car? That's nothing. by McD · · Score: 1

    Two years ago, they were tracking what stores you were in via your phone.

    Suppose that technology has dried up and blown away in the meantime due to the deafening cry of the outraged shoppers?

    --
    "Given the pace of technology, I propose we leave math to the machines and go play outside." -- Calvin
  46. criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because they are just scanning plates in the parking lot and offering an app to locate your vehicle how do they know it's your vehicle you are trying to locate. couldn't this be misused by stalkers and criminals as well as the police?

  47. Wrong solution to the wrong problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real problem is that you have thieves in your area.

    Fix your country: taxes should be used by the state to share money between people. Less poor vs. rich means less thieves.

  48. Wrong solution to the wrong problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real problem is that there are thieves in the area.

    Fix the country: taxes should be used by the state to share money between people. Less poor vs. rich means less thieves.

  49. That's because licenses are for tax collection by billstewart · · Score: 1

    The legal justification for a license plate and registration tags is to show that you've paid taxes on your car, and you're not allowed to drive on the street in the state where you live unless you've paid the tax. Some states have expanded that justification to do things like annual safety inspection or air pollution inspection. Of course, once you've got license plates on the car, the police find them useful for all kinds of other things.

    Parking cars on the street without current registration is no different legally from driving them on the street, just easier to catch. Parking on private property doesn't usually require your car to be licensed, though some jurisdictions have anti-blight or anti-redneck laws that ban parking unlicensed cars on your lawn, but parking them inside buildings is fine (assuming your building isn't also condemned by anti-blight laws.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:That's because licenses are for tax collection by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      In the UK, if you keep your car off the roads, you can pay no road tax, but have to fill out a SORN (statutory off road notification) which means you can't park on a public road but you can keep the vehicle on your own property.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:That's because licenses are for tax collection by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

      In the US we have something similar. It's called "planned non-operation" or PNO.

      --
      I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  50. Re: Covering plates on private property. by billstewart · · Score: 1

    No - but you can be booked for actually covering your plates on public roads. So if you've got a motorized gizmo that raises or lowers a cover, and you remember to uncover before you go out on the street, you're fine. The laws that apply when you're on Westfield's private property are just trespassing laws, so if Westfield feels paranoid about it and wants to kick your Anonymous Coward car out of their parking lot, they're fine.

    The slippery slope in the US was airport parking lots. Some years before 9/11, pretty much all the parking lots at major US airports started putting license plate cameras at the entrance, and wouldn't raise the entrance gate unless they could see your plate. The lots were concessions operated by contractors, not by the government, so you couldn't complain about illegal surveillance, but obviously they were feeding that data to the cops, who could use it to track who's at what airport and when. And the contractors contended that they were doing it to prevent fraud (so if you parked there for a month, you couldn't walk up to the gate the day you left, press the button and get a new ticket, and pay for an hour's parking, which might be mostly bogus compared to the cost of the enforcement system but probably did happen on occasion.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  51. Automatic Number Recognition is widespread by billstewart · · Score: 1

    It's not just a UK thing - there are systems marketed to police in the US that you can mount on a car and read the license plates of all the parked cars you drive by, and by now they might even be able to read them on moving cars. Not surprisingly, the target market is parking enforcement - a city might not be able to justify buying them for surveillance purposes (unless they can scam some Homeland Security budget), but for parking ticket revenue generation, they're pretty much self-funding. And license plate reading has been around for a long time for catching tollbooth evaders, but all that needs is good image capture, and you can have humans read it.

    Back in the 90s, San Francisco was tearing down the old Central Freeway because of earthquake damage, and a month before that they started tracking license plates of cars that used the freeway. They farmed out the job of reading the license plates to cheap prison labor, and sent everybody a postcard saying "Next month we're tearing down the freeway, please find yourself a different route to work." Worked fine. It didn't have to be real-time, and it didn't have to be close to 100% accurate or complete - it kept most of the regular commuters out of the area, and the local surface streets could cope with the traffic load from the small fraction of people who didn't know about it.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  52. Chatwsood Westfield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was chatswood. We used to wonder if the reason your license plate appeared on your thermal-print ticket was to stop you moving your car in/out of the car-park to reset after the 2 free hours. Then the license plate numbers dissappeared off the tickets. Never got the "whaffor?".

    Also it used to like license plates from other states.

  53. Constant but unused by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    You're asking how can you remember something that's always constant when you occasionally forget something that's always variable?

    The thing that's variable is something you just a few hours ago.

    The thing that's "constant" is something you have to know (for most people) every few years. You don't even need to know it for your registration, you just mall that in... the only time I need to know my license plate number is at hotels. Often I come up with the license plate for my previous car first, because it has been so long since I've had to remember a license plate number.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  54. 9/11 reference by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    Westfields is also the operator of the World trade centre mall in New York
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mall_at_the_World_Trade_Center

    I'd rather have them know a stolen truck is being driven up into their carpark, * before * it blows up. better than having police review security camera footage after the fact.