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

  • New cycle & bus routes for Wellington 
    March 7, 2022
    New Zealand capital authorities have agreed development of safe, connected bike network
  • Google in talks with world car makers on autonomous cars
    January 15, 2015
    Google has begun discussions with most of the world's top automakers and has assembled a team of traditional and non-traditional suppliers to speed up efforts to bring self-driving cars to market by 2020, a top Google executive has said. Those manufacturers are said to include General Motors, Ford Motor, Toyota, Daimler and Volkswagen. "We'd be remiss not to talk to ... the biggest auto manufacturers. They've got a lot to offer," Chris Urmson, director of Google's self-driving car project, said in an
  • Agencies in pursuit of high-speed WIM accuracy
    April 20, 2017
    Alan Dron looks at where WIM is heading in the near future. As Weigh-In-Motion (WIM) systems grow in sophistication and accuracy, they are increasingly being used in more active roles to help ensure road safety through enforcement action against overweight vehicles.
  • Growth of telematics-based pay as you drive car insurance systems
    July 17, 2012
    Car insurance made cheaper by telematics has returned to news headlines in the UK this year. Will it really take off this time and can vehicle tracking provide an effective tool for enforcing or encouraging insurance compliance? Jon Masters reports Will 2012 go down as the year that telematics-based car insurance took off? In the UK at least, a groundswell of new policies, with premiums priced on the basis of tracked and analysed driving style, suggests a turning point has been reached. Some would argue t