January 16, 2005
DON'T GO WHERE YOU SHOULDN'T:
To Protect and Intrude: GPS Proliferates as Costs Fall; Privacy Strained (Ariana Eunjung Cha, January 15, 2005, Washington Post)
John Phillips peered down at the computer screen. Something didn't look quite right. It was 9:11 a.m. on the West Coast, or just past noon in the East, and all the bus drivers were supposed to be on break. The map of the District of Columbia showed hundreds of red blips representing vehicles that had been parked for more than an hour. But then there was one black dot, a lone bus, moving rapidly in the northwestern quadrant of the city.Could the D.C. Public Schools bus have been stolen -- or worse -- hijacked with children still on board?
Phillips quickly clicked on the icon representing the vehicle and relaxed at what he saw. The bus was in front of the Kennedy Center. It was on a field trip.
From inside a dimly lit room behind two-foot-thick concrete walls, a steel door and jail gate, Phillips and eight other staffers in this 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week command center are like all-seeing gods, watching over thousands of people across the continent.
Phillips works for Satellite Security Systems Inc., or S3, one of a growing number of private companies providing satellite tracking services to anyone willing to pay. Once a fabulously expensive tool for the military, the technology is becoming part of everyday life, spawning dozens of new uses.
S3's clients include school districts such as the District and Fairfax County, state and federal government agencies, police departments and companies. But there are plenty of individual customers, too -- people interested in keeping tabs on new teenage drivers, Alzheimer's patients, philandering spouses.
The position of vehicles or people is determined by gear they carry that includes Global Positioning System, or GPS, technology, which uses a network of satellites orbiting the Earth to pinpoint the location of things on the ground. The information is then beamed to S3's computers.
On a recent weekday, the screens were flashing through maps almost too quickly for the human eye to process. A computer technician was making his way along Sully Avenue in Centreville. Milk delivery trucks were swarming all over Houston, making their morning drop-offs. Tank cars of oil were traversing the Midwest.
S3 tracks so many vehicles that federal homeland security officials rely on it to make sure none venture near sensitive areas. One map showed that all was quiet near an anonymous red-marked mass outside Denver.
Phillips said the tracking systems have helped increase security as well as efficiency for those who use them. [...]
The growing use of location-based technology is prompting a backlash from those who worry about its potential for invading people's privacy.
There was never much intellectual coherence behind the notion of a right of privacy, but technology has made even the possibility of such nonsensical. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 16, 2005 10:17 AM
The TV show "24" last week showed just what technology can do. I presume it's accurate because the show isn't supposed to be science fiction. I wish they would use that technology whenever they're looking for somebody, like Osama bin Laden, for instance.
Like stem cell research (I don't have enough knowledge to vote yea or nay on this) and other innovations we may not like, things can't be un-invented. Things we're comfortable with now, were at one time considered inhuman. Like autos. It was determined by science that human being would be not be able to withstand speeds of more than 20 miles an hour when cars were first introduced.
Posted by: erp at January 16, 2005 10:42 AMerp:
If you really want to drive yourself insane, try focusing on how you would go about giving modern science and medicine the same degree of credence and respect you would advise our ancestors to if you could.
Posted by: Peter B at January 16, 2005 10:52 AMAlthough there were some yelps from some of the privacy mavens when it first came out, no one seems to be really paranoid about GM's OnStar system right now when it comes to someone calling 911 if you drive your car off an embankment. However, there have been other reports of at least one or two rental car companies using the GPS to determine if their customers have been speeding.
Take that to its logcal conclusion and you have the 21st Century equivalent of the old "speed trap" towns, where law enforcement agencies across the country start sending out traffic tickets because the GPS device in your car showed you were doing 36 mph in a 35 mph zone. If that ever comes to pass, the complaints today over cameras at intersections will seem like a walk in the park compared to the anger that will rise up from drivers across the nation.
Posted by: John at January 16, 2005 1:27 PMThey'll all have black boxes like airplanes soon.
Posted by: oj at January 16, 2005 1:34 PMTrucks over here (UK) have had a form of "black box" ("spy in the cab") for years. I believe they're meant to measure things like whether the driver takes a decent break, as well as speed and distance etc. Much resented originally, I don't think anyone's bothered anymore. I'm not sure I'd be bothered really if cars got the "black box" because there are a lot of potential benefits.
The difference lies in whether a space is public or private. You're right that there's no "right" to any privacy, but I think this is in the public sphere. In the private sphere this is different.
Posted by: Alastair at January 16, 2005 5:28 PMIm am somewhat chagrined by purported Christians objecting to having how they drive shouted from the housetops. He knows how you are driving, why would you ever care who else knows?
Posted by: Lou Gots at January 16, 2005 8:51 PMThere is a difference between privacy and annonymity.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at January 17, 2005 3:11 AM