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

  • Assessing the potential of in-vehicle enforcement systems
    December 4, 2012
    Jason Barnes considers the social and ethical ramifications of using in-vehicle safety technologies to fulfil enforcement functions. Although policy documents often imply close correlation between enforcement, compliance and safety – in part, as a counter to accusations that enforcement is rather more concerned with revenue generation – there is a noticeable reluctance among policy makers and auto manufacturers to exploit in-vehicle safety systems for enforcement applications. From a technical perspective t
  • Is machine vision the future of enforcement?
    January 25, 2012
    Leading automated enforcement system suppliers talk about how they see machine vision technology affecting the sector in the coming years
  • MoceanLab discovers new Covid car-share use
    October 20, 2020
    The coronavirus pandemic has prompted some radical re-thinking of mobility services. Ben Spencer hears how MoceanLab car-share vehicles are delivering care to LA's homeless
  • Speed reduction measures - carrot or stick?
    January 23, 2012
    In Sweden, marketing company DDB Stockholm employed a mock speed camera as part of a promotional campaign for automotive manufacturer Volkswagen. The result was worldwide online interest and promotion of the debate over excessive speed to the national level. A developing trend in traffic management policy is to look at how to induce road users to modify their behaviour by incentivising change rather than forcing it through the application of penalties. There have been several studies conducted into this; an