Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Technology

RFID License Plates in the UK 550

Posted by michael from the ubiquitous-surveillance dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The UK Government is studying license plates with embedded RFID tags. The plates can be read from 300 feet away and in rapid succession by readers embedded in the road or by 'surveillance vehicles.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RFID License Plates in the UK More

RFID License Plates in the UK

Comments Filter:

  • Just Great... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Lyssa Watson ( 754835 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:05AM (#9388116) Homepage
    A key benefit of the e-Plate is that the tag provides an encrypted and secure ID code which is registered in the UK Ministry of Transport's vehicle database. This code prevents tampering, cloning, or other forms of fraud that can currently happen with camera-based systems. Additionally, the e-Plate is designed to shatter if anyone tries to remove or otherwise tamper with it, and the tag can be programmed to transmit a warning if any attempt is made to dislodge the plate.

    They said that for DVD encryption too, but look where that got us. Eventually, someone, somewhere will find a way to tamper with it and the best the government will be able to do is, like always, use heavy fines to curb the spread, but it will be futile, just like it was with DVD encryption.

    I bet I'll have the plate transmit "YHBT" within two years.

    When will they learn?

    • Might as well paint your car 'Arrest me Red' (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Trigun ( 685027 ) <evilNO@SPAMevilempire.ath.cx> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:09AM (#9388175)
      Tampering with plates is a bit easier to track than ripping your DVD's to PC.
      Pass by a cop broadcasting l0s3r, and I'm sure he will not say, "Oh well, I guess we can't track him anymore.'
      • Very true, but you could change your broadcast to another valid car, or change it every 30 seconds, or a number of things (including no broadcast)...

        • Re:Might as well paint your car 'Arrest me Red' (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Trigun ( 685027 ) <evilNO@SPAMevilempire.ath.cx> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:46AM (#9388694)
          And when they tie your plate RFID to a silver Land Rover and you're driving a blue Ka, or they pull you over for faulty plates and see a bunch of wires hanging out of your boot to the plate, the Government is going to be able to track you much easier in your 6 X 10 prison cell.

          But don't let me stop you from tampering with your plate.

        • How about (Score:5, Interesting)

          by phorm ( 591458 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:47AM (#9388724) Journal
          You grab the RFID of plates for whatever dumb politicians allowed this to go though, and then replicate them for anyone who feels like taking a quick little spin down the road?

          You don't even need the RFID on your plates, in fact it might would better with a seperate RFID responder (RFID is fairly passive, can you send a boosted return signal?).


          The safety/privacy concerns of this are staggering. Yes, I can always sit and watch for "license plate X" on the highway, but I'm sure that it wouldn't be hard for a non-governmental person/corp could actively scan plates with a homebrew scanner. Think advertisement, lots of advertisement (as they start to track your movements and where you frequently park your car), or perhaps even stalkers.

      • Re:Might as well paint your car 'Arrest me Red' (Score:5, Interesting)

        by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:06PM (#9389046) Journal
        If this is RFID, it's eaasily jammable, as the RFID signal is quite weak.

        As a matter of fact, I can't understand how these people are planning to read these things from 160 feet away. Maybe a directional antenna?

        On the upside, perhaps these will soon be set up in an automated fashion at measured intervals in the United States. It will become impossible to speed over stretches of highway covered by these. Auto accidents still kill a tremendous number of people annually -- a lot more than "terrorists", whom we in the US have given up a lot more freedoms to combat (and spent more money on) than simply automated license plate reading.
        • Speeding is not necessarily dangerous. I'm something of a 'fast' driver and have a squeaky clean record after almost six years of driving. What's more important is driving safely, I.E. using turn signals, not cutting people off or weaving between lanes, etc. The worst offenses in bad driving can be perpetrated at almost any speed, and I see them all the time in my current place of residence, New Orleans.

          I do recognize that energy is a function of mass linearly and of velocity geometrically, but cars are

          • "The worst offenses in bad driving can be perpetrated at almost any speed, and I see them all the time in my current place of residence, New Orleans..."

            Hahah...I live down here too!! I don't look at my speedo unless the radar detector goes off....and down here, the cops are back in the 'stone ages'...using X band.

            On the other hand...it is hard to go fast in many places down here....as that the ENTIRE city is one big 'speed bump'. With all the taxes we pay down here...why can't we have nice roads, and a d

    • Re:Just Great... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by cuzality ( 696718 )

      Time to get one of these [theregister.co.uk] for my car...

    • Re:Just Great... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by cshark ( 673578 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:34AM (#9388536)
      Over the next few years, there's going to be a huge market for redio jammers to block RFID chips. If I had some money to invest, I would start looking there. Just a thought.

    • Re:Just Great... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Rostin ( 691447 )
      The obvious difference between breaking the copy protection on DVDs or software and tampering with this tag is that no one is coming to your house and checking your computer for illegal decryption software or software without the proper licenses.

      Anyone with the right equipment can and will read the tag on your car, though. If this anyone happens to be the police, they might also check to see if your hacked tag corresponds to the physical description of your car, or perhaps a license plate number (which it

  • Before (Score:5, Informative)

    by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:06AM (#9388133) Journal
    Before you get your panties in a knot, please note that modern license plates were originally designed so that they could be OCR'ed. They currently use this at the borders here in the US.

    • Here's a video and more info (Score:5, Informative)

      by swordboy ( 472941 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:12AM (#9388212) Journal
      Here's a related video [aiag.org] showing the RFID capability now installed into tires. Note that the manufacturer is programming the VIN number into the tires. It is only a matter of time before you will not be able to get tires installed without them programming the VIN number.

      More infor here [aiag.org].

      • Re:Here's a video and more info (Score:5, Funny)

        by worst_name_ever ( 633374 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:20AM (#9388323)
        You can put away the tinfoil hat - tires aren't that hard to install yourself! Just think of them as round rubber Linux distros and you'll be fine.
        • Well, yes. It IS possible to install a tire without special equipment. IF RFID tags are required by law in tires, obviously the government would not want to allow people to have tire mounting machines to make things harder. Then, they will make it impossible to buy the tires without the tags. Finally, once all the used tires run out, you will probably have a really difficult time finding a tire with no rfid tags...
          • Finally, once all the used tires run out, you will probably have a really difficult time finding a tire with no rfid tags...

            Nah...there are about 10 people in my development that have the same car as me.

            --trb

          • Facts about tire-mounting machines (Score:5, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:06PM (#9389050)

            FACT: Discarded auto tires contribute 1,243,918 tons of non-recyclable trash to US landfills every year.

            FACT: In the United States and Canada in 2003, 87 children under the age of eighteen were seriously injured in accidents involving unregistered tire-swings 70% of which were suspended from unregistered trees.

            FACT: In Europe, where private ownership of tire-mounting machines has long been prohibited, not one violent crime was committed with an unregistered tire-mounting machine in the last decade..

            FACT: In 2003, 4,451 children below the age of 18 were killed or seriously wounded in accidents involving improperly-secured home tire-mounting machines.

            FACT: In French Guiana, where the law forbids private ownership of radio frequencies, the wealth-gap between rich and poor is only 10% of that found in the United States, and studies have shown unequivocally that tires wear up to 40% longer.

            FACT: In both Cuba and Canada, publicly-funded health care ensures that doctors can't afford large, heavy SUVs, resulting in significantly diminished levels of tire-related non-recyclable waste.

    • Re:Before (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Dr. Bent ( 533421 )

      Yeah, but I can read a license plate without any special equipment, and therefore I know exactly what information is being given to anyone who sees my plate. If you start putting RFID tags in license plates, who's knows what "extra" information they might start encoding on them.

      • but... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:21AM (#9388338) Homepage
        This also gives the government (or anyone else who can hack into their systems) the ability to locate your car at any point in time.

      • Re:Before (Score:4, Insightful)

        by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:21AM (#9388339)
        therefore I know exactly what information is being given to anyone who sees my plate

        Surely the problem is not the information that is transmitted, but how it can be related to other information?

        If a policeman can scan your numberplate and from that tell who you are and access your medical records to see that you went to the doctors last week to have your piles examined, does it matter that they only thing that is transmitted is a number?

    • Re:Before (Score:4, Interesting)

      by sirket ( 60694 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:47AM (#9388721)
      A border crossing is a HELL of a lot different than when you are just driving down the road minding your own business.

      Sometimes I think the British government completely missed the message in 1984. They seem to view that bleak future as a goal instead of as a warning.

      As draconian as various US laws are, there is one country (these days) that I can always count on to out do us on the big brother front and that is England.

      -sirket

  • Privacy? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PktLoss ( 647983 ) * on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:06AM (#9388136) Homepage Journal
    My big concern with this is of course, privacy. Survelance cameras are already very common in major cities, adding this technology to the cameras or to areas near the cameras would be trivial. Using this technology to monitor access to corporate parking lots would make this very attractive to the private sector. Companies could band togethor to sell data, or sell it to private investigators, who will combine the data into one large database. Your employer can determine the RFID tag for your car by comparing the ID read with the ID used to get into a corporate controlled parking lot. Then the company (or your significant other) can search in some pay-for-use database maintained by firm X to find out where your car was on tuesday when you wern't at work (or missed that dinner date). If your car spends too long near your competitors office, who knows what the corporate response would be.

    Government of course will respond in turn, DMCA laws in the US would prevent anyone there (assuming a similar thing was implemented) from determining what their code was (since it is 'encrypted'). The curious would be thrown in jail, or sued, and the major corporations would still enjoy the power.

    • Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by xlyz ( 695304 )

      why bother with plates when you already have cell phones?
    • Why not just hire some sap for minimum wage to tail "free thinkers". They can already do that, and it would be pretty cheap.
      Maybe they already do... muuuuhahahahah

    • Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Informative)

      by DangerSteel ( 749051 )
      Your plate number is not private, at least not in the US. I am ignorant about whether it is on the other side of the pond. In the US it is public information and the information can be requested, for a small fee usually.

      What would one do with your tag number anyway? Would you expect someone to get a car that is your make and color, fake a plate with your number on it to commit a crime with it? Man that's way too much TV talking...

      • How 'bout this one... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by cagle_.25 ( 715952 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:23AM (#9388360) Journal
        Let's say I'm a Muslim in Oregon, and I'm accused of committing a terrorist crime in Cleveland. I have multiple people willing to testify that I was in Oregon at the time. But the police have three different RFID reads placing my car in Cleveland at the time. Which one of these has more credibility in a court of law? Which one should have more credibility?

      • Re:Privacy? (Score:4, Informative)

        by mikael ( 484 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:52AM (#9388819)
        What would one do with your tag number anyway? Would you expect someone to get a car that is your make and color, fake a plate with your number on it to commit a crime with it? Man that's way too much TV talking...

        To get around the congestion charging fee in London, people having been using fake number plates. Saving five pounds a day is a good incentive to do so.

      • Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Informative)

        by Malicious ( 567158 )
        My plate number may not be private, but where I park, how fast I travel, the frequency in which I use certain roads, and so on, is.

        Easy way to solve this problem, cover the back of your licence plate in refridgerator magnets. That'll throw off the scanners in a big way, and be completely impossible to notice with the naked eye.

        Wear your tinfoil hat while driving as well, just to be sure.

        • Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Octagon Most ( 522688 )
          "My plate number may not be private, but where I park, how fast I travel, the frequency in which I use certain roads, and so on, is."

          No they are not. You do all those things in public view so they are not private. Anyone can observe you doing those things and not violate your privacy. The only difference between a computer tracking your driving with RFID and being observed by a private investigator, jealous spouse, deranged fan, etc., is that it is trivially easy for the computer so there is little bar

    • Re:Privacy? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Dark Lord Seth ( 584963 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:43AM (#9388654) Journal
      Survelance cameras are already very common in major cities

      I live in some minor shitsville in the middle of the Netherlands and those goddamn speeding cameras are common around here. In fact, there are so many around here the provincial goverment has denied a request to place more cameras, due to the fact there are so many already. Heck, there's a 800m stretch of road with FOUR cameras. If you go 54 km/h for even a few dozen meters, you're bound to end up 28 euros poorer. Now before people will scream "safety" and "the law", I'd like to remind people this road could take 80km/h with ease, there are NO sidewalks adjacent to the road and no building for kids or disabled people.

      This, coupled with the facts the dutch police has "prestation contracts" that state they will bring in a minimum amount of euros on fines and the fact the police only posts cameras and surveillance vehicles where profitable instead of logical really make me doubt wether the police is there for my security not for my money. I really don't want an RFID tag in my car so those greedy bastards can squeeze more money from me. What's next, are they going to tie the RFID tag into the onboard computers? A nice note reading "You were speeding, your front lights are too dim, you ran a traffic light three days ago and you're using the wrong diesel fuel.", along with a 150 euro bill? I just wish the goverment would stop lying to me and say "Yeah, we're doing it for the money." instead of this bullshit story about safety.

      • Re:Privacy? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bas_Wijnen ( 523957 )

        So you think the rules are wrong? Prestation contracts don't sound good to me, either. But stopping new technology which will most probably save them money (cameras with OCR, including the errors they make, are expensive) for it doesn't seem right to me. Remember that they can pay for schools and hospitals (and fighter jets and wars... sigh) with the money they save.

        The RFID in your license plate doesn't hold any information that isn't on the plate already. It's only easier to read it with a computer.

  • This is a Good Thing... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jon Chatow ( 25684 ) * <slashdot@jdforrester.org> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:08AM (#9388147) Homepage
    ... because, at least in central London, all car number plates are OCR'ed for use in the Congestion Charge scheme; RFID would have less inaccuracies (like the Somerset farmer who got a demand for his 17mph tractor being 150 miles away in London).
    • I do NOT want to have my whereabouts monitored by anyone who has a reciever. No information whatsoever is given in the article on any safeguards that they plan on placing in the system to protect against abuse of this system. If the govt tries to impose this upon us I will unplug the battery/run 220V through the plates to decommission the RFID emitter.

    • For those of us not from the UK (Score:4, Informative)

      by pragma_x ( 644215 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:23AM (#9388365) Journal
      I didn't have a clue what the poster was talking about (Congestion Charge)... so I asked google:

      http://www.cclondon.com/whatis.shtml [cclondon.com]

      Suddenly, this RFID buisness doesn't seem so bad in comparison to what Londoners are already going through.

    • Re:This is a Good Thing... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:33AM (#9388523)
      like the Somerset farmer who got a demand for his 17mph tractor being 150 miles away in London

      I for one support measures that discourage people from driving inefficient polluting farm equipment hundreds of miles just to go shopping in the city. Attempting to maneuver a bulky tractor on cramped London streets was surely a safety menace to motorists and pedestrians alike. He should have considered taking some form of public transportation instead.

      If RFID tags can help keep tractors and combine harvesters off of our city streets, then I support them 110%.

  • Privacy in the UK (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rosewood ( 99925 ) <.rosewood. .at. .chat.ru.> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:08AM (#9388155) Homepage Journal
    As an outsider, I have noticed that there is not much in the way left of Privacy in the UK.

    Is this just not considered important over there? Is a "greater good" mentatlity strong? Or, is it just a no one really cares so the government can get away with anything put on your tinfoil hat oh fuck I got a ticket for going 5mph over attitude?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Its fuckwit Blunket (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      No, the people are willing but a blind man named Blunket is trying to remove all privacy for everyone else. He's blind so he cannot drive, so penalties for drivers are always good. He's blind so he cannot read his own mail, so mail privacy is not necessary.

      The man is totally unfit as a home secretary, yet nobody here wants to tell the blind bastard to fuck off, its not politically correct.

      I'm moving out of the UK soon and I won't look back.

    • Re:Privacy in the UK (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:25AM (#9388410)

      I think the truth is that people in the UK get upset about what the newspapers tell them to get upset about. There is very little about this kind of thing in the papers, so people don't get upset about it.

      However, you can be sure that if the EU proposed RFID license plates, the newspapers would be all over it and there would be national outrage. People seem so concerned with opposing anything the EU does that they don't notice the things their own government is doing.

    • Re:Privacy in the UK (Score:5, Insightful)

      by misterpies ( 632880 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:48AM (#9388741)

      Unfortunately, you're absolutely right. We have CCTV cameras covering most public places, we're about to get compulsory biometric ID cards, and now this.

      Political debate on this has become monopolised by the law-and-order brigade. Any attempt to raise a protest about privacy and citizens' rights is met with one or more of the following responses:

      1. If you've nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear
      2. If you don't support us, you're helping terrorists/criminals/illegal immigrants
      3. The "people" have no time for "bleeding heart liberals" like you (the favourite put-down of our beloved Home Secretary)

      Funny thing is at the same time the government is taking away the last shreds of our privacy, they're talking about changing the freedom of information laws to prevent citizens from finding out what _they_ are up to.

      Why don't the people react? I don't know. Maybe it's the incessant banging on from the press about the crime, immigration and terrorism. I'm starting to think it's because most British people couldn't care less about their rights so long as there's beer in the fridge and football on the telly.

  • Sensors in the roads... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JustDisGuy ( 469587 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:08AM (#9388163)
    ...and speeding tickets in the mail. 'Nuff said.
    • Not in Michigan, US. If you go the speed limit then you might get run off the road. Everyone goes at least 5 over. If they did that then everyone would get at least 1 ticket in the mail. Then, everyone would vote to have this not allowed or vote all the people that were for it out of office

      Oh course, here we don't even have the money to fix the roads.

    • Much better... (Score:4, Funny)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:23AM (#9388362)
      If this would get the police off the road, and let me speed at will with just a bit of tinfoil, then I'm all for it!
  • Seems that some of the proposed uses assume that all cars will be fitted with them.

  • ALRIGHT!!!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by arakon ( 97351 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:10AM (#9388182) Homepage

    Now they'll know exactly how fast i was going! without using those arbitrary numbers those radar guns make.

    Now all I need is a RFID tag stapled to my little buddy so the government can track how often i get it on with the wife. May come in handy for the future population controls and killing off all ppl over 30....

    besides our cars are supposed to be just metaphorical extensions of our penises anyway right?

    The future is so BRIGHT!

  • How DARE they invade our privacy! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mr. Neutron ( 3115 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:10AM (#9388184) Homepage Journal
    Do you mean to tell me that that wherever people drive in the UK, their cars will be "tagged" with a unique identifier that will allow a car to be "traced" back to an owner?

    We can't put up with this, people. Next thing you know, police will be able to take this "tag" number, run it though a "computer data base," and find out how many traffic violations you have committed! I, for one, fight tooth and nail to keep this from coming to pass.
    • I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but here goes...

      I don't understand why everybody in the US, UK and other powerfuel economies worries about this. Why not look at the good side of this tracking system? It could help law enforcement: got a ticket for speeding? Well, duh, that's written in traffic regulations. I find this good, coming from a city where everyone drives like crazy, causing fatal accidents (e.g. drunk drivers). Also, what about tracking stolen cars?

      • The reason is simple: Our governments are already strong enough to run well.

        One of the MAJOR factors in a "free government" is the fact that you need RESTRICTSIONS on what the government does, not more power to the government.

        Yes, the government can do all the things you mentioned. The truth is they don't need the RFID to do di ti. Want to stop cars from being stolen? Let people put explosive car alarms in them. Set them off, the car explodes.

        What you thought that was over-kill? Too many bad conseq

  • Such a wasteful effort (Score:3, Funny)

    by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06@TOKYOemail.com minus city> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:10AM (#9388187)
    If the UK Government were properly informed of the US effort to inplant RFID chips in all US/EU inhabitants (at the nape of the neck) over the past 15 years, they'd recognize that is redundant. But Ultra-Blue Order #745-JUR won't allow that. Oh well.

    By the way, I'm making all of this up. And you didn't read it anyway. So it never happened.

  • One has wonder (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tuvai ( 783607 )
    The UK government, especially under Blair, has long used the motorist as a large source of tax revenue. Whether it be through high Fuel costs, a large number of hidden speed cameras (most of which do little in the way of preventing accidents), toll roads, and various other initiatives under the banner of "increasing the use of public transport".
    The government would only invest in this with one motive and one motive alone, squeezing more money out of the motorist through draconian fines.

    • Re:One has wonder (Score:4, Interesting)

      by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:54AM (#9388859)
      No-one has an intrinsic right to drive a car. They pollute, take up a lot of space, do damage to public property and in the vast majority of uses (in big cities at least), are completely un-needed.

      Public transport works, and works well. I don't need a car where I live (london), even though I work miles away from where I live. I just jump on a bus, then change for a train. That takes me clear across London in well under an hour.

      You see people driving around on their own in cars, taking up as much room as half a bus (yet half of the bus carries over 30 people, as opposed to just one).

      I see motorists as a large source of pollution and wasted space. I think it's absolutely fine to tax motorists. In london especially, there really is no need for a car. Got something to take home? Stick your hand out in the road and climb into the big, shiny black thing that's pulled up within a minute. The taxi driver will know his way to your house better than you will, and you don't have to drive all the way there yourself.

      If someone can please explain to me why people feel the need to drive a large, wasteful, polluting machine around already congested roads and not get charged a penny for it, I'm all ears.

      • Re:One has wonder (Score:3, Informative)

        by phreakyb0y ( 535275 )
        Woah! i'm not sure which country you are living in but it sure isn't britian - the public transport in this country is a joke! i don't live in london but i have had the misfortune of going there many times - both using public transport and my own car - and while my car may take fractionally longer (due to traffic jams) i would use the car anyday. the trains are dirty, uncomfortable, crowded and always late not to mention very expensive

        don't even get me started on the shit holes that pass as buses!

        i have

  • in gas pumps too (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ch-chuck ( 9622 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:13AM (#9388226) Homepage
    with the recent spike in US gas prices, I'll bet some companies would like to put this in gas pumps to track drive offs.

  • Speeding tickets. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This isn't about about privacy. This is just another way to charge you for speeding tickets.

    Tickets are a major source of income for many cities. Especially in areas where people commute across state lines, and police target people with out-of-state tags, whose owners don't pay local taxes.

    In my area, there are cameras and speed detectors right along the borders. When out of state drivers go into the state and fail to follow the excessively low speed limits in and around the border area, they get fined

  • Similar technology (Score:2, Interesting)

    by grunt107 ( 739510 )
    from the 90s here in the U.S.A was a change to vehicle OBD (on-board diag). OBD III was to transmit to roadside nodes any vehicles that had slipped into emissions failure. The LE (law enforcement would then send a 'fix or else' citation in the mail. One feature of this was vehicle location, direction and speed were also sent, so although they would 'never' use said information, it was an easy extrapolation to speeding tickets.

  • Thank god! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by FyRE666 ( 263011 ) * on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:16AM (#9388267) Homepage
    I'm really glad this new technology will soon be available to our brave boys in blue, valiantly battling crime on the streets of the UK.

    </Sarcasm>

    Honestly, aren't the motorists here persecuted enough? We have speed cameras popping up in every lucrative "accident blackspot" in the UK (I have a number near me that appeared on roads where I can honestly never recall hearing of any accidents, but the local school curiously has none outside the gates), we're getting taxed off of the roads despite the fact the public transport system would be ridiculed by any visitor from afghanistan. So what does our "brilliant" government do? Find a new way to bring in the much needed revenue from those crazy car drivers....

    I can't see this going live until after the next election though - it would be political suicide after everything else Blair and co have done.

  • Police chase (Score:3, Interesting)

    by alex_ware ( 783764 ) <alex DOT ware AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:17AM (#9388275) Homepage
    Sarge: What's the Number Plate of that car that just shot past us? Other Policeman: Let's see, thats strange. Sarge:What? Other Policeman: POL 1C3 Sarge: Thats this cars registration plate.
    @>plates -r -100ft
    POL 1C3
    @>plates -c -t
    ? POL1C3
    plates changed

  • Time For This? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by blueZhift ( 652272 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:21AM (#9388331) Homepage Journal
    Do the UK police have time for this sort of thing? Is crime really so low that they can chase after motorists when the inevitable false alarms, tampering (accidental and otherwise) take place if the RFID tag system is deployed? I mean really, collecting data is the easy part, but at the end of the day real live humans have to follow up on this "data".

    Ugh, can't you just feel Big Brother's breath on the back of your neck? In the end though, I have faith that the Britons won't take this lying down.

  • They also put them in PEOPLE (Barcelona) (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:21AM (#9388342) Homepage
    Link to CNN story [cnn.com]

    Which I submitted yesterday, but they rejected. Putting them into people seems FAR more interesting than into licencse plates.

  • thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mandalayx ( 674042 ) * on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:26AM (#9388416) Journal
    Additionally, the e-Plate is designed to shatter if anyone tries to remove or otherwise tamper with it,

    The pranksters in the UK are going to LOVE this one.

    My opinion..
    Useful applications:
    1) Easier to implement no-toll-booth toll roads
    2) Police purposes

    Drawbacks:
    1) Privacy - but I'm thinking of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, and it doesn't seem to conflict with anything. Is it our right to drive unfettered on roads paid for by taxpayers?
    2) Cost
    3) Battery power

    Should be interesting. I have a feeling that this is going to go through and 50 years from now, we'll wonder how ancient peoples from 2004 managed to get away without RFID license plates.
  • ...look at stories such as this and worry about the loss of privacy. What makes you think you have any privacy now? I'm not trying to be flippant, but privacy in the US and most of Europe has become an illusion. Your cell phone can or will be able to track you; your use of credit cards tracks you; the fact that you have a social security card (in the US) or a license can be used to track you.
    Many of us, myself included, thought that our privacy would be robbed of us by some huge, overbearing government like a thief in the night. But you know what? We gave it up for nothing but convienence and our never-ending desire for newer and better gadgets.

  • Break out the microwave oven (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BlackHawk-666 ( 560896 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:28AM (#9388443)
    Additionally, the e-Plate is designed to shatter if anyone tries to remove or otherwise tamper with it, and the tag can be programmed to transmit a warning if any attempt is made to dislodge the plate.

    Wonder how susceptible this is going to be to a microwave oven. Sure, it's going to fuck your oven, but it should also provide an easy way to disable the tag. Drilling a hold through the RFID would also be effective I suspect.

    I understand the need to monitor criminals and terrorists, but I really don't like the idea of having the government (anyone in fact) able to freely track my every movement. We have the Oyster card (RFID enabled travelcard) for the Underground over here, os it will get to the point one day that you won't be able to buy or sell or travel without being monitored. Kinda biblical almost.

  • Big Brother is really happening. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot@spamgoe ... c a l u m . org> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:29AM (#9388454) Homepage
    The UK is really descending into a Big Brother state, with Blunkett trying to get all the draconian measures in he can.
    I wonder, if there was a list of steps that a state needed to take to be completely like 1984, how many of these steps the UK government would have taken?
    Man arrested at work for sending a text (SMS) with a few "questionable" keywords [theregister.co.uk]
    I think the government will only be happy when they tax us so much that we can't afford to do wrong, and they can monitor our movements all the time.
    I also think the UK wouldn't be so high on the list of targets if we didn't blindly support whatever the US does, which usually seems to anger much of the world.

  • OT: dollar bill tracking with serial #s (Score:3, Insightful)

    by British ( 51765 ) <british1500@gmail.com> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:39AM (#9388603) Homepage Journal
    (tinfoil hat)
    I know wheresgeorge.com does this for fun, but how come Ashcroft isn't using serial #s in US dollar bills to track their journey from corrupt hand to corrupt hand in the name of terrorism?

    Think about it: You withdraw cash from an ATM, it records the #s on the bills handed to you. 2 weeks later FBI agents bust an anthrax transaction, and some money is confiscated. The money in the confisaction found has serial #s on the bills that matched the ones givent to you by ATM. Are you a suspect now?

    Seems like # tracking on bills would prevent any coverups by going "cash-only"(ie no bank transactions, etc)

    (/tinfoil hat)

  • How about chipped pets? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by cellocgw ( 617879 ) <cellocgw@gmaEINS ... minus physicist> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:40AM (#9388612) Journal
    Just wondering, sort of, if I have 3 or 4 nice doggies in the car, all of whom have RFID chips (at least here in the US, it's a nationwide pet recovery ID system) implanted. What are the chances that their 4 numbers will get intermingled with the licence plate ID?

  • It's good, after all... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Neurotoxic666 ( 679255 ) <neurotoxic666 @ h o t m ail.com> on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:51AM (#9388802) Homepage
    Somehow, there is a good side to all this (the RFID and other various tracking/IDing/syping govt goodies).

    When a government/organisation relies totaly and fully trusts a computer system to do its work, then, in the end, it gives us more freedom. Computers can be hacked, cracked and controlled by whoever actualy tries hard enough. A real person cannot be so easily fooled.

    There are two types of people who criticize technology: those who understand nothing about it but fear it or want to use it to control everything (like the senators who pass stupid laws), and those who make this technology and don't want it to be used against them. Do the math: WE got them by the balls.

    The more society will rely on technology, the more freedom we can get. Freedom will be "underground" though...

  • Why I oppose this. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rice_burners_suck ( 243660 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @11:59AM (#9388933)
    I am so sick of governments trying to control people to an increasingly greater extent each day. This is yet one more example. First, they'll convince everyone it's so their car won't get stolen (as if the thieves don't know that all they have to do is remove the plate before towing the vehicle away), and then they'll use it to mail you a ticket every time you go over the speed limit, don't make a complete stop and wait three seconds at stop signs, or make a right turn on red in an intersection where it isn't allowed, when it's 3 in the morning and there are no cars on the road for 100 miles.

    I know that in the case of vehicles, these types of things are designed to create revenue for the local police departments and whatnot, but honestly, I don't think this will help make the roads any safer. All it will do is force you to mind every little detail of the law, no matter how insignificant, even in situations where it really doesn't make much sense, as in the case of standing at stop signs for 3 seconds when there are clearly no cars around. I do NOT advocate running stop signs, or even just slowing down and then blazing through them. On the contrary, I hate it when people do that. But if you're stopping, and the car is almost at a complete stop, and you can clearly see that there are no cars approaching, and it is perfectly safe, then what difference does it make if you actually come to a halt and wait for three seconds?

    The officer who stops you for that should be looking for the reckless driver, late to work, who is weaving between the cars, going twice the speed limit, and so stressed out that he's about to get someone killed. But instead, the officer will wait on some secluded street, where about three cars pass in an hour, because he knows that none of those three cars will make a 100% stop at the stop sign, and then he'll write those drivers tickets. Meanwhile, on the main road, someone is driving drunk on the wrong side of the road. If you've ever wondered why the police are always there when you do something insignificant that is "wrong" but they're not when something truly dangerous is going on? That's why.

    So the short version of all that is that I am against putting any kind of tracking technologies in vehicles because first, it will be for convenience, then, it will be for safety, and finally, when nobody is noticing and the technology is widespread and in place, it will be for revenue purposes. Without adding safety.

  • News Flash! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by simetra ( 155655 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:02PM (#9388986) Homepage Journal
    License plates are a means of identifying your vehicle while it uses public roads, highways, etc. Nobody ever said you had a right to total anonymity, especially while driving a vehicle on public roads. Get over it!

  • From Tyranny to Self-Rule to Tyranny (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bubba_ry ( 574102 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:10PM (#9389115)

    I am no political scientist, nor a historian for that matter, but I remember coming across an interesting idea posited by one of America's 'founding fathers' (either Washington or Franklin?)

    --begin paraphrase--

    It is evident that in history, cultures progress through different states of rule. In many cases, the people are ruled by a strict tyranny. The people will revolt and establish some sort of self-rule. After a period of time, those in power will gradually take freedoms from the people whilst the people slip further into ignorance and laziness, thus capitulating their rights to the elite. At some point, the government has come full cycle and exists as a tyranny. This repeats itself throughout history

    --end paraphrase--

    All people should voice their opinions about the use of this technology. Technology has a habit of limiting instead of broadening people's freedoms.

    Remember, a flood starts with one drop of water...

  • pull the plug ! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sxpert ( 139117 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:12PM (#9389143)
    according to the article, the thing needs batteries to work...
    remove the battery, no more tracking...

  • Well let me be the first to say... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bechthros ( 714240 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:24PM (#9389305) Homepage Journal
    ... I told you so (although that sentiment's probably redundant by now). RFID apologists defense of choice is that the readers only work at a distance of up to 18 inches, IIRC. Well these work up to 300 feet. Meaning that as soon as RFID is universally accepted, I just get my hands on one of these 300-foot-range scanners, and go driving through the suburbs looking for the house with the most stuff to rob... And yes, I did read the article, and yes, they are battery powered, but so what? Creating a very small battery to go along with the RFID chip is a technical problem that's very easily overcome, just like the 18 inches limitation was easily overcome when many here declared vociferously that said limitation would make RFID all cuddly and innocuous.

    The point is that everybody who said that RFID will never have a range longer thatn 18 inches have already been proven wrong, even before RFID has even begun to be implemented. You pro-RFID folks care for some salt with that crow?

    The real point of the matter is that NOBODY has a right to see what possessions I have in my house. Not a stranger/burglar on the street, not the government, NOBODY.
    • You do realize there is not one standard for RFID right? There's all sorts of RFID's that aren't compatable with eachother. There's RFID's that measure temperature so they can tell you if food has spoiled during shipping. There's RFID's that can be disabled by a certain signal... etc

      An RFID designed to be read from 18 inches won't be read by this RFID scanner from 300 feet (if that scanner can even read it properly from the 18 inches). Furthermore the RFID's intended for products can be disabled.

      The s

Slashdot Top Deals

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.

Close