Slashdot Log In
Australia Mulling a Nationwide Vehicle-Tracking System
Posted by
timothy
on Sun Sep 28, 2008 03:02 AM
from the coming-soon-to-$yourcountry dept.
from the coming-soon-to-$yourcountry dept.
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that as political support for Australia's version of the national ID card is waning, the powers that be have found a far more effective way to catalog the populace. CrimTrac, an Australian government agency responsible for designing technical solutions to aid policing, is due to hand in a $2.2 million scoping study for the introduction of a nationwide automatic number plate recognition system (ANPR). It seems that as well as ANPR, the system will also collect images of drivers and passengers with high enough resolution for identification purposes. All ANPR data collected would be made available to participating agencies in real time, and retained for five years for future investigations."
Related Stories
[+]
"Mobile Plate Hunter" Cameras Raise Questions 580 comments
The Washington Post has a story on "Minority Report"-style license-plate scanners that mount on police cars. They are the size of softballs, cost $25K, and can scan and run thousands of plates a day through the local Motor Vehicle Administration database. The easy mission creep these devices encourage is summarized in the article: "Initially purchased to find stolen cars, a handful of so-called tag readers are in use across the Washington region to catch not just car thieves, but also drivers who neglected or failed their emissions inspections or let their insurance policies lapse. The District and Prince George's County use them to enforce parking rules... 'I just think it makes us a lot more effective and a lot more efficient in how our time is being used,' [a senior detective] said." The article doesn't mention what happens to the data on legal plates. Suppose the DHS decides it wants a permanent archive of who was where, when?
Submission: Australia introduce vehicle tracking system by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
on-start service. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Surely you're in the bathroom. Just chase the 'roo out.
Also - Toilets flushing backwards? Doesn't that mean stuff comes *out* of the bowl and flies up at you? Urgh
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As an Aussie I would just like to point out that things do fly out of dunny's - that's why the redbacks live under the seat.
Re:on-start service. (Score:4, Informative)
"Help! I don't know where am I, but i see a kangaroo and the toilets are flushing backwords"
For those whose knowledge of Aussie plumbing is limited to that one episode of the Simpsons, Australian toilets do not flush backwards. The design they use does not produce any swirling motion at all.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
For those whose knowledge of Aussie plumbing is limited to that one episode of the Simpsons, Australian toilets do not flush backwards.
Oh thank god, I wouldn't want to shower and shampoo the rug after every use.
The design they use does not produce any swirling motion at all.
It doesn't involve a jet engine strapped to the top does it?
Re:on-star service. (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if Australians used American-made toilets (with swirling motion), they still wouldn't spin backwards. How water spins down a drain is related to the design of the unit, not the earth's rotation. (urban legend).
BACK TO ARTICLE:
"Only criminals need fear tracking of their cars," is the most common defense to this proposal. My response: "And what if the government makes travel a crime? Then we ALL become criminals." Why would government make travel a crime? Well besides the obvious case of dictatorship, there's also the possibility a government might outlaw travel for environmental reasons. Or because oil is scarce.
A person is not truly free unless he has the right to travel whereever he wishes without restraint or monitoring.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
My response: "And what if the government makes travel a crime? Then we ALL become criminals."
In that case it'd be more effective to just stand in the road, that way they don't have to hunt you down.
I love the "What if they do something different in the future" arguments. What if the government declares martial law and starts using chemical warefare on its own citizens? Surely we mustn't have an army so we can stop such a catastrophe!
Re:on-star service. (Score:4, Insightful)
History shows that all governments eventually become tyrannical in nature. (For example Rome started as a Republic, devolved into an Imperium, and finally ended as a dictatorship.) More recently, we have our own President spying on us with the US PATRIOT Act giving him power to tap all phone conversations everywhere.
Why give some future tyrant the tools to abuse his power & track all travel? We should limit government power every chance we get, to guard against that future tyrant *before* he arrives on the scene.
Parent
Re:on-star service. (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed. The whole idea is incredibly stupid. "CrimTrak"? If they know someone is a criminal, go to his house, his parent's house or his girlfriend's house. 95% of the time he'll be there. For the other 5%, we need panopticon video surveillance of the general population! It's obvious! How ever did we make it to 2008? The criminals should have killed us all by now without this technology!
Please, somebody, somewhere cut me a f*cking break and stop this stupidity.
Parent
Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
well since Australia really is nothing but an overgrown prison anyway I'd say they're wasting their money.
This will also look good to all those people that were thinking of emigrating there. This study was probably funded by the Canadian government ;)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Something similar is currently happening along the Mexican / Texas border ;)
And I hear they're trying to increase the average IQ of Alaska by moving some of their people to Washington...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If only we had more data available, we could stop all crime!
but what would we do without politicians?!
oh, you mean, if only THEY had more data...
Re:No ... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, crime will stop when the second to last person dies.
Parent
Re:No ... (Score:4, Funny)
I don't know about that. When I am all alone some of things I do to myself are a crime too :)
Parent
Re:No ... (Score:4, Interesting)
I disagree. Anything you do to yourself, since nobody else is harmed, is not a crime.
The only reason certain "self" activities like masturbation, smoking dope, or committing suicide are outlawed is because we got a bunch of petit-dictators (aka control freaks) who want to control everybody else. There's no justifiable reason to outlaw these activities as long as the only person I am harming.... is myself.
"No person has a right to harm another. And that's all the government should restrain him." - Thomas Jefferson
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Aaah but you'd be the de facto king (or other term if you wish, you're the king!) and so you could declare any law you want. Now while you COULD make everything you do illegal, it'd be a funny thing to do.
Australia Card? (Score:5, Informative)
From the summary: "support for Australia's version of the national ID card is waning." Um, what national ID card?
So what exactly is the Hawke government going to do now?
Re:Australia Card? (Score:5, Informative)
The closest it got to being implemented was in 1985 during the Hawke government's Australia Card bill. This was at the height of the Hawke Labor government's popularity, and it got the government into so much trouble and lost the government huge capital clout. Hawke dissolved the parliament and held new elections, but still was unable to pass the bill. Later on, a Royal Commission heavily criticised the idea and put the mater to rest. See this [wikipedia.org] for more details.
ANPR is right now, a "scoping study". Australia is nowhere close to perfect, but it has strong civil institutions, and you can make sure that heads will roll and blood will spill if this gets anywhere close to being proposed as a bill. Since then the law has moved in the complete opposite direction. The Privacy Act (1988) specifically mentions that no unique identifier issued by a government agency or corporation can be used by another entity for the purpose of identification. In practice, this means things such as driver's license number, a Tax File Number (equivalent to U.S SSN), or the medicare number can not be used by any corporation or agency other than the one which issued it in the first place, for identification.
Right now, this is a classic example in Australia of the state vs. individual liberties, taught in any university course about identity and privacy. I've met many 'ordinary' (read: not politically active) people across all fields of society, from social workers to lawyers and IT managers, and even the newer generation who is too young to remember the debate first hand (like myself) is definitely acquainted with the subject and its implications. So, unless the poster somehow managed to time travel from 1985, "public support for national card in Australia is wanning" is like saying "public support for Hillary's health care bill is wanning" or "public support for president Nixon is wanning".
The issue did come to surface once again, after former Liberal (which here means Conservative) Prime Minister Howard made some comments about it in 2005 after the London bombings, but even then it was heavily frowned upon and both parties knew better than to include it into their agenda.
Australia is nowhere close to perfect, but it has strong civil institutions. This is a "scoping study". The moment the study is published, if it recommends anything remotely close to implementing CimTrack's ANPR, you can make sure that heads will roll and blood will spill in the electorate.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
this means things such as driver's license number, a Tax File Number (equivalent to U.S SSN), or the medicare number can not be used by any corporation or agency other than the one which issued it in the first place, for identification.
What about a license plate to a car?
Australia Choices? (Score:3, Insightful)
Certainly a reasonable post. However note to a man not one has discussed to the other side of the issue. How far and by what means should law enforcement do it's job without constituents lambasting them for their failures (and they will most assuredly fail)? A weighty question, but then privacy is weighty and plenty have commentary on that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The Privacy Act (1988) specifically mentions that no unique identifier issued by a government agency or corporation can be used by another entity for the purpose of identification. In practice, this means things such as driver's license number, a Tax File Number (equivalent to U.S SSN), or the medicare number can not be used by any corporation or agency other than the one which issued it in the first place, for identification.
Interesting theory, but your TFN is probably known by your employer, your bank, centrelink (social security), your superannuation fund as well as the tax office. Of course, you don't have to give it, you could just pay 46.5% tax instead. Now that's freedom of choice to keep your privacy! With the growth of the Family Tax Benefit and other centrelink payments a very large proportion of the population is on some form of government payment. Since many of them have the government take it from one hand as PAYG t
something we can use (Score:2, Funny)
load the band up onto the back of a flatbed truck, then hoon around while pretending to perform.
request the resulting footage under the freedom of information laws, then release as the video to your latest single.
I have only one thing to say. (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively you can just mount the kerb, it's allot easier.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why they need *more* cameras, so the other cameras will catch you doing that.
I'm all for this system (Score:3, Funny)
but only if it's to tag known criminals.
That means the politicians have to get one first.
Re:I'm all for this system (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you were kind of joking, but I think that would be a great test for any new law like this. Something to go in the constitution. Any politician voting to approve any new monitoring law has to make all data collected about them (and their family?) publicly available in as near to real time as possible for the duration of their term of office, and a few years afterward, just to make sure.
If the law gets in, the monitoring is only put in on a trial basis for (say) 6 months, after which the politicians are given the opportunity to change their mind about their vote (eg the law is put to vote again).
If any politician doesn't want to vote for such a law on that basis, then that's probably a pretty good indicator that the law is too intrusive.
Parent
Hey, I am serious! (Score:2)
Privacy Masks? (Score:3, Interesting)
People will start wearing masks.
Personally, I have always wanted an excuse to wear a burqa. Yes, I am serious too. When we get to the point that facial recognition is everywhere I am just going to start obscuring my face. If I have to do that then I want to be comfortable doing it. Naked underneath a burqa seems to be a good place to start. I am only half kidding.
That will be a pretty weird looking world when you have to protect yourself head to toe to obtain a little privacy.
You think it won't happen? You think I am overdoing it a little? They are going to keep that data for FIVE YEARS. You think they won't sell access to it, illegally or otherwise? Of course they will. You better not cheat on your wife or girlfriend. Go to happy finish massage parlors in the middle of day. Basically do anything you want to be private, since it will be a trivial matter to find out EVERYWHERE you have been for the last 5 years.
Time for the sunglasses, false beard and large hat (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How about tinted windows? Harsh Australian sun and all that.
Countermeasures? (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, this is a technical problem begging for a technical solution. What's it take to detect cameras and hit them with a laser? A watt or so should do to fry the image sensor.
-jcr
Use IR laser diodes (Score:3, Interesting)
An IR laser diode that is left unfocused will do the trick.
It won't zap the sensor, but unless they have used a decent IR filter it will saturate the chip to the point of not registering anything else.
Reasons why you may want to avoid doing this:
- no idea if there will be retinal damage if someone else looks at it
- ANY camera will get upset, so an traffic monitoring will show up your car as worthy of close inspection
- AFAIK, anything that hinders reading your license plate by whatever means is illegal (it i
Re:Countermeasures? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Jcr is a suspect for damaging government property, because the camera was working just fine as of 11:38:13 seconds and ceased to work at 11:38:15 after his vehicle passed."
Gang,
in its various incarnations including the rest of YRO, this is *the* signature theme of our century. It's gonna take something really culturally decisive to resolve this. Simple "low level" tricks will not quite work.
The reason why is that cumulatively, the ideas proposed so far have been logically inconsistent! Unfortunately, prosecuting attorneys seem to enjoy crushing people with logically inconsistent motivations.
I don't have the answers. All I know is that the macro problem is *really tough*.
Parent
I'm okay with this, IF.... (Score:2)
I'm actually okay with this, assuming its all automated, and the police require a warrant to gain any information from the system (and they can only get the information specified by the warrant).
Re: (Score:2)
yeah right, so all that will do is increase the false positive rate.
partial prints are just that, partials and should not be used for ID purposes, but hey, what do I know.
In some countries it seems to not matter who they get behind bars, as long as there is somebody associated with the crime it's good enough.
Same with DNA testing, it's best at *freeing* people, unless there is an exact match.
Getting very few crime cases solved is going to bring you full tilt into a police state.
See 'England'...
Re:ANPR already in UK (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeh but thats counting all of the private entity Cameras. There seems to be a widespread myth these days that every camera you see everywhere is linked together. So that perhaps a mean with a white beard and an over exuberant use of visa vis can watch us 24/7.
A fraction of the cameras are owned and controlled by the government and even then, from the limited information ive obtained from watching crime programs, getting detailed information accross even county borders isnt easy.
Take off the tinfoil hat please.
Parent
Re:ANPR already in UK (Score:5, Informative)
Im not trying to disappoint the CCTV-Tinfoilhatters abroard in the US, but nobody sits in a room like Lex Luthor spying on individuals and following them about their business with camera. It is an extremely BORING pastime. The guys running these networks generally spend all their time releasing remote doors, monitoring queue lengths, opening car parking barriers and signing out keys for storerooms.
or reading The Sun.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't understand why people insist upon putting cameras everywhere. The terrorists that struck on 9/11 walked past several security cameras, and not one of them was flagged. They still boarded the plane & committed their crime.
Cameras are worthless, except for very simplistic uses like issuing automatic speeding tickets.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cameras aren't best used for realtime monitoring in some big room.
They're best used for retroactive analysis. Somebody becomes a person of interest, and now once you know where they were at any point in history you can find out everywhere they've ever been, everybody they've ever talked to, everywhere anybody they've ever talked to has been, and where they are right now.
I'm sure the first place we'll see these abused is in civil cases. Divorce cases come to mind very quickly.
Re:Welcome to the Global Village (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, surveillance *can* be used by a police state, but it can be used against the state as well.
Not if the police state makes it unlawful for anyone but themselves to use surveillance. In the UK, you'll more than likely have your camera taken off you if the police spot you filming them.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Not if the police state makes it unlawful for anyone but themselves to use surveillance. In the UK, you'll more than likely have your camera taken off you if the police spot you filming them.
Please cite the law that allows them to do this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Please cite the law that allows them to do this
Simple: it's behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace. IANAL, but this covers everything the police don't want you to do. They don't have to obtain a conviction - they merely arrest you, take you for questioning, confiscate your camera then let you go without charge some hours later.
You will then have been summarily imprisoned for a period of time - although you were never found guilty of any crime.
This is purely deterrence (and very effective it is, too) to stop anyone from doing anything they do
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, surveillance *can* be used by a police state
You know what else can be used by a police state? Pens! Clearly any country that uses a pen is a police state.
(not arguing with you, simply backing up your point).
Re:Welcome to the Global Village (Score:4, Interesting)
By the way, did you know that before the first world war, you could travel and live ANYWHERE in the world freely and without restriction? Passports were put in place to control the flow of people during the war. Guess what? The legislation was never revoked after the war. We just live with it, and it has got progressively More suppressing over the years. Do you really think governments have your interests at heart when it comes to personal freedoms?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)