Skip to main content

Innermost thoughts

At risk of being accused of going on like a broken record (and, perhaps, mystifying those readers of the post-vinyl generation with my choice of expression), I want to come back to... well, everything but the technology.
February 27, 2012 Read time: 4 mins
Jason Barnes, Editor of ITS International
At risk of being accused of going on like a broken record (and, perhaps, mystifying those readers of the post-vinyl generation with my choice of expression), I want to come back to... well, everything but the technology.

Contemplating developments over the last decade and more, it's clear that the ITS industry (and, by proxy, transport and travel management) have made huge technological strides. It's also learned what many of us do by middle age: that life never quite turns out like you expected.

Some very promising technologies have failed to realise their full potential; others have literally been left stuck on the hard shoulder whilst others still have sped past in the fast lane.

Policies have evolved - we've seen the environment rise to stand side-by-side with safety, once the singularly most important flower in the garden. Efforts to improve international cooperation and standardisation churn on, and no doubt will continue to do so as new regions and technologies come on board (or, as is more likely in the case of the latter, head offboard).

Everything's just sweet and dandy.

This magazine will present at this year's 6456 ITS World Congress in Orlando, where we'll witness - once again - demonstrations which prove that vehicle can talk to infrastructure can talk to vehicle. What's missing is the funding to allow such systems to be rolled out across nations from - oh, let's say 9am next Monday morning. What's not missing is the technology, in abundance, to do all this.

The original concepts of cooperative infrastructure, with microwave roadside beacons every few hundred metres along every road in the world, now seem quaint and clumsy alongside the pared-down, more mobile solutions currently favoured.

But that's progress... and I've just spent the last 300 words talking about technology when I promised that I wouldn't.

No, I'm done with technology. It works - however we decide to go forward, there are little bits of hardware and software genius out there lurking, just waiting to transform my life.

The thing that continues to vex me most is privacy. It's the one area where we've signally failed to make meaningful progress. Which is shameful; no-one with any working knowledge of ITS can reasonably claim ignorance of the issue.

Plenty can step forward and claim a prize for willfully ignoring it or trusting to fate and the gods that, somehow, things will all sort out for themselves.

As CVTA President Scott McCormick points out on pp.59-60 of this edition, true privacy doesn't exist; we can mask identities but they'll always be accessible somehow. 1692 TomTom's Nick Cohn and 163 Inrix's Ted Trepanier make some interesting comparisons between how privacy is handled in the public and private sectors on pp.62-65 and I have to agree with their assertions that the ongoing public perception is that the public sector is clumsy and careless when it comes to handling individuals' personal data.

Whether the injection of a commercial imperative or greater sanction would change that, I truly don't know. I do know that the other prevailing opinion, that the state is somehow malevolent, is nonsense.

All of the traffic engineers I've ever met are (in their professional lives at least) concerned only with making our transport networks work better. When it comes to individuals' personal affairs (and I use that word deliberately, in all its forms), they're occasionally negligent but pretty much ambivalent. Yet we continue to let single issue pressure groups hold sway.

The truth is that it's perfectly possible to put in place sufficient checks and balances such that no-one in officialdom would dare to abuse a person's right to privacy. It's never been any more or less true that if you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to fear. So it's time for our elected officials to take a much more robust line on this. And it's time for a great many of us to get over the idea that we're anywhere near as interesting as we think we are.

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Australian road pricing, road funding needs more debate
    January 31, 2012
    Everyone in the road transport industry in Australia is talking road pricing - everyone, that is, except the politicians. Christine Keyes reports. At the end of 2008, Australia's road transport industry was wringing its collective hands, unable to raise more than $100 million from an individual bank for any Public Private Partnership (PPP). The A$750 million Peninsula Link project, announced by the Victoria Government in March 2009, was the first road project in the country to be put out to market as an ava
  • New technology revolution in urban traffic control?
    January 26, 2012
    Urban traffic control is a well-defined and practised art. Nevertheless, there are technologies here and on the horizon with the potential to revolutionise how we do things. By Gavin Jackman and Andrew Kirkham, TRL, and Jason Barnes. Distributed monitoring and control of urban traffic networks and flows is nothing new. PC-based Urban Traffic Control (UTC) is now well established and operating in many locations around the world. However, it is worth considering the effects of the huge growth in the use of sm
  • Tolling is a ‘powerful tool to maintain and manage an infrastructure network’
    August 15, 2017
    Officials have recently moved to scrap tolls on several highways for the first time in 40 years, bucking a national trend toward more tolls on mostly urban roadways to shift the costs of transportation to those who use the roads, writes Associated Press. A regional authority voted this week to eliminate tolls on the Cesar Chavez Border Highway in El Paso. On the same day, Dallas city council rejected plans to build a toll road along the Trinity River. The council's action appears to be the death knell for a
  • The free and open internet is dead
    June 25, 2018
    A key US vote may have changed what internet service providers are allowed to charge and how they restrict content: Joe Dysart explains why this has consequences for ITS companies. While most people were rushing around last December, grabbing last-minute gifts for the holidays, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to drive a stake into the heart of the free and open internet. In a majority vote, the agency killed ‘net neutrality’ - a policy that has prevented your regional internet service