Tech Might Set You Free: How GPS May Have Foiled a Radar Gun
posted by Deven Desai
A teen has fun and races around town. The local constabulary catches the miscreant and today has him dead to rights. The officer has a radar gun which shows the youth was traveling at 62 MPH in a 45 zone. The teen will learn to obey the law. Or it may happen that the alleged offender’s parents have placed a GPS tracking device on their child’s car. That device shows not only where the car was but what speed it was going. An expert for the state has a report stating the GPS is inaccurate but changes testimony on the stand and says the “device was ‘very’ accurate, to within a couple of meters on location and to within 1 mph on speed. Dr. Heppe also pointed out that the GPS device released instantaneous data, and not data averaged over a distance.” (quoted from this article which quotes the GPS device maker’s press release).
I don’t know how accurate these reports are. But if true, the facts are fun. As the article notes, there are some curious issues here. First, the teen may not have known about the device. Second, the privacy folks who worry about tracking have reason to check this one. If the devices are that accurate, would an insurance company require it or offer lower rates for those who agree to be tracked? (I think I read that a form of this practice has begun somewhere but if anyone has more concrete information please share). Should the state require these devices? I remember the seventies gas crunch and 55 MPH laws. We may see (though I doubt the political will is there) similar acts today. Would that national issue support a general enforcement of this nature?
In general this one may be another step towards perfect enforcement. Zittrain talks about this in his book the Future of the Internet.
As a country that sees itself as founded on liberty, perfect enforcement poses real problems. Some may offer a nothing to hide type of retort. In a way these small steps to prefect enforcement remind me of the world where we in the United States could say oh look at the Soviets. They need papers to go anywhere and look over their shoulders at all times. Now, however, we may be ones with the papers (or digital tags) and looking over our shoulders. EPIC and Privacy International have a study comparing surveillance societies but if I remember correctly several comments had some good questions about how it was done. (Has anyone found a better comparison study? Please share if you have.)
Here’s a possible problem with saying just obey the law (although if you stray, we will get you no matter what): it misses a deeper question about the possibility of transgression. One may need to have the option of breaking the law to be free to follow it. Then again one may have to return to Czechoslovakia to be free.
July 19, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Posted in: Privacy
Print This Post
Leave a Reply