Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy IBM Technology Your Rights Online

IBM to Help UAE Track Drivers on the Road 438

Posted by timothy from the well-that's-thoughtful dept.
Mr.Bananas writes "InformationWeek reports that IBM has announced a deal with United Arab Emirates in which it would provide speed tracking devices that will automatically warn violators of traffic laws: "The telematics device will use multiple microprocessors based on IBM's Power Architecture, and will have the capability to monitor the speed of the vehicle and send out a warning if the car surpasses the posted speed limit." GeekCoffee goes on to report that tickets will be issued automatically to violators who ignore the warnings: "If the voice warning is ignored, the system would use a GSM/GPRS link to beam the car's speed, identity and location to the police so that a ticket could be issued.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM to Help UAE Track Drivers on the Road More

IBM to Help UAE Track Drivers on the Road

Comments Filter:

  • UAE? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Cowclops ( 630818 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:05AM (#12260298)
    I thought they were referring to the "Ubiquitous Amiga Emulator"

  • Awesome (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SmartSsa ( 19152 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:06AM (#12260303) Homepage Journal
    That's pretty awesome for a place where traffic law informcent in itself is pretty weak and the drivers are pretty insane. But really, how is one to guarentee these devices stay in the cars?

    I for one would pull it off my car and throw it somewhere.

    But hey, some may like it and some may see it as a violation of their "freedom to drive like an idiot" :) There's two sides, naturally.

    • Re:Awesome (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SerpentMage ( 13390 )
      You are right in that there are two sides. However, I think it is more "Freedom to drive like an idiot". After all we are humans, humans that cherish freedom above everything else. As a friend says to me, average means that 50% of the people are dumber than you. But it also means that they have the right to be dumber than you and you can't do anything about it!

      I think what would bother me regarding the UAE deal is that it will be VERY one sided. Do you REALLY think that any UAE citizen, or any UAE roy

      • Re:Awesome (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Heian-794 ( 834234 )
        They could easily ensure that no one removes it from their cars by simply making it illegal to do so. Require an inspection-like sticker saying that "this car has a monitoring device installed", and if you don't have one, instant fine.
        • Inspection stickers are easily forged or illegally transfered from a compliant vehicle to a noncompliant vehicle. I've seen people swap whole windshields to get a "tamper-proof" inspection sticker on their car.

          I'd run random spot-checks and seize any vehicles that were missing the required equipment. That gets people's attention.

        • I was in Saudi about a decade ago and it was a legal requirement for all cars to be fitted with pseudo-speed limiters - if you went over the highway speed limit it would issue an incredibly annoying BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP. It didn't physically limit the speed, perhaps because the lawmakers realised the occaisonal necessity of speeding, probably because the average Saudi driver takes it as an Allah-given right to drive like Dale Earnhardt on acid.

          There was nothing in the law about the device being operational,

        • In /.ese...

          1. Car drives by sensor
          2. Car does not send radio signal
          = Prison!

          billy - who thinks it's a GOOD thing when /.ers don't have criminal minds

    • Re:Awesome (Score:5, Insightful)

      by floydman ( 179924 ) <floydman@gmail.com> on Sunday April 17, 2005 @04:32AM (#12260587)
      Well after living there for over 12 years, travelled all over Europe, USA, i would rather drive there... where you can get jailed for breaking a light, highways are well equipped than any other place i have ever been to..., and ppl can try for years to earn their driver license because the tests are so tough..

      So please, lets not stereo type each other, shall we..

      P.S: i am not a citizen of UAE, not do i live there any more.

    • This seems to be an extension of the general tech-upgrade that the UAE are going through right now. For example, (not sure if /. covered this one), they are using robot camel jockeys [bbc.co.uk], it seems in an effort to stop children being kidnapped or purchased for use as jockeys. Likewise, one of my clients sells real estate in Dubai, and you should see the level of technology in one of their apartments... unreal.

      Still, the parallels between this and for example Japanese culture are interesting; once a society re
    • Its also my right to not be monitored when im NOT doing anything wrong.

      So, yes, there are 2 sides..

      Perhaps if you put this on people that keep getting speeding tickets... But on regular citizens, no thanks the government doesnt need to know where i go.

      • Oh I'm fine if the government/whoever has the power to know where I (and everyone else) goes.

        As long as I also get the same power to know where everyone including the government/whoever goes.

        Everyone gets to watch everyone. Fair eh?

        Want to make fun of my habits and post embarassing pictures of me here and there? Fine, let's go see who's been watching me, and pull up various video clips of Mr Nosy.

  • How far does this go? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sackadatfunk ( 841468 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:09AM (#12260313)
    Would this system also be implemented in public vehicles, such as the police themselves?
    Shouldn't the cops get a ticket as well, if they are not "chasing the bad guy", say trying to get to the local krispy kreme before it closes?

    • Re:How far does this go? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MisterLawyer ( 770687 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {reywalekim}> on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:43AM (#12260431)
      Relevant personal experience:
      About a year ago I was driving on an interstate in Illinois, not too far from Chicago. For about an hour straight I was within a few football fields of a state trooper. We were both speeding at between 5-15 mph over the limit. At first I was cautious to stay a ways behind him so he wouldn't notice, but for at least half the time, I was the car immediately behind him. Suddenly he slows way down and gets behind me and pulls me over. I point out to him that he had been doing the same speed as me for about an hour, and that we were both going with the flow of traffic, and that he obviously wasn't in a hurry to get somewhere to stop a crime in progress. He said some like "it's a bad idea to follow cops", and that "just because I'm speeding doesn't make it legal for civilians to speed".

      This is the problem with speed limits in most of America. They are set so low that at least 90% of traffic is always exceeding the speed limit, including the cops, and thus the cops can essentially pull over anyone they want, whenever they want.

      So much for the Constitution and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure...

      • How far does this go?-Till the wheels fall off. (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        "This is the problem with speed limits in most of America. They are set so low that at least 90% of traffic is always exceeding the speed limit, including the cops, and thus the cops can essentially pull over anyone they want, whenever they want."

        Define "low"? Is that just below the point when the steering wheel starts shimmying?

        Also cops can already pull you over. What makes you think they need "speeding" as justification?

      • Super weak! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by cfalcon ( 779563 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @12:45PM (#12262813)
        Yea, I dislike this a lot.

        Ironically, his advice "Don't follow cops" is something I follow very closely. And the companion "Don't let cops follow you".

        You would only believe these two things if the following conditions were fulfilled:

        (1)- At some level, police have rights and privledges that you do not.
        (2)- At some level, police have the ability to harm you.
        (3)- At some level, police are unfair and arbitrary.

        If any of these things were not true, then you would not have a problem with police being near you. (1) and (2) are true and most people don't have a problem with that. The question is, why don't more people bitch about (3)?

        The current traffic setup is basically, you are guilty. *How* guilty determines how the police act. The cop in your case wanted to flex nuts, so he did. The guy who pulled over my law abiding father for not stopping twice at the stop sign (seriously, he said you had to stop once at the white line, then again two feet forward where the intersection actually starts), the cop who pulled me over when I wasn't speeding and claimed I was doing OVER TWENTY OVER (and had a radar gun to show that *something* was going over twenty over), and the wide array of other police hassles means that you simply can't trust them.

        You can't trust them because they have more power than you, traffic court is a kangaroo court (I had pictures to show that the officer couldn't see me to verify that his 20+ reading was coming from me, because it obviously fucking wasn't, and that didn't matter either), and are often arbitrary.

        It only takes a few bad cops to make me distrust the whole lot of them. Not because I feel that they are all bad, but because statistics state that I'm going to get pulled over for no goddamn reason x%, where x is positive, when a cop is around, and 0% when no cop is around.

        So when I see them, I react with fear, and get the fuck away from them before they hurt me any more.

        Good job, society!
    • In many places, they can get reprimanded, or even fired, if they get too many complaints about their driving.

      If you see a cop do something really stupid, make a note of the car number, location and time. File a written complaint with the police department.

      Some departments have an institutional culture of ignoring traffic laws and department procedures in non-emergency situations. Others insist that their officers set a good example for the public.

  • We SORELY Need this Technology in the US (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eno2001 ( 527078 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:15AM (#12260329) Homepage Journal
    As my latest JE [slashdot.org] points out, people just don't follow the speed limit anymore or maintain safe braking distances. I don't think they will until corrective measures are taken. And the only corrective measures are those that are enforced on drivers. Driving is not a hobby or a skill, it's a practical mode of transportation. If you want to race, go find a race track and have at it. If you want to get from point A to point B, then follow the laws to the letter, leave plenty of time for travel, and don't bitch when you get a legit ticket.
    • ... follow the laws to the letter, leave plenty of time for travel, and don't bitch when you get a legit ticket.

      If everyone started doing that, they'd just lower the speed limit to the point where following it became impossible so that they could keep giving out tickets.

      It's never the guy going 65 in a 50 that's a problem. It's always the guy doing 50 in a 50 when everyone knows the accepted speed on the road they're on is 70.
      • Nice rationalization. "It's not highly skilled drivers like myself that are the problem, even though we routinely ignore speed limits, and other traffic laws, it's those damn slowpokes who get in our way."
      • Has it occured to you that, in edition to the conspiricy to make massive amounts of money off tickets (presumably to fund a secret branch of the military or something), there might also be an actual need for speed limits so that people don't die on the road?

        Come on, speeding fines are not a major revenue source, the point is the money being taken away from the offender, not that it goes to the goverment afterwards (who of course should make no money, and shouldn't have to pay police, fire etc., because tax

        • Re:We SORELY Need this Technology in the US (Score:4, Interesting)

          by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @07:33AM (#12261092)
          Come on, speeding fines are not a major revenue source

          Actually, they can be. Cincinnati is getting ready to institute speeding cameras, and the expected revenue is $12 million [wcpo.com] per year. Some members of the city council are looking at this specifically as a revenue source [cincypost.com] to help balance the city budget.

        • You've never been through (insert ubiquitous small town here), have you? There are towns out there that exist solely as speed traps. They usually appear on a major state or US highway (not interstates) between larger population centers. Since local authorities set the speed through their towns, they will ramp down the speed limit 20-30 mph in less than half a mile. At the end of that is the town's lone cop with a radar gun and your ticket already half filled out. If you haven't already vaporized your
      • It's always the guy doing 50 in a 50 when everyone knows the accepted speed on the road they're on is 70.

        Bwahaha! Yeah, it's the people who drive safely and according to the official regulations who are dangerous -- not us speed freaks who break the rules and make new ones for themselves simply because we're so goddamned good drivers. Nice rationalization.

        You wouldn't have any problem with the people doing 50 if you were doing 50 as well. "The other people are driving 70 mph too" is a pathetic excuse a

      • 'accepted' of course by people who know little to nothing about road engineering, automotive engineering, or in many cases driving.

        Having the rules made up by people who don't understand the game they are playing may make sense to you, but it seems pretty stupid to me.

        The 'guy going 65 in a 50' is a problem when he encounters traffic going 50 or some other unexpected road hazard, and can't stop in time, of course. Blaming the 'guy going 50' is like blaming a shooting victim for getting in the way of bulle
    • Of the population, how many who do not follow the speed limit or maintain "safe" breaking distances (which seem rather arbitrary) get into accidents? I don't think that automatically handing out tickets will necessarily make any of those people safe drivers, it will just generate more revenue for the state. With race tracks shutting down due to not wanting liability, it would seem the only feasible way for that to work would be state-run tracks. There people could legally race and perhaps even be taught how

      • Our results show that the risk of involvement in a casualty crash is more than twice as great when travelling 10 km/h above the average speed of non-crash involved vehicles and nearly six times as great when travelling 20 km/h above that average speed. The mechanisms explored for this increase in risk (where higher speeds are associated with longer stopping distances, increased crash energy and more likely loss of control) also suggest that a reduction in the absolute speed of traffic is much more important

      • or maintain "safe" breaking distances (which seem rather arbitrary)

        I guess it's arbitrary if you have no knowledge of physics. Safe distance is pretty easy to measure if you know the rate of deceleration of your car. I think the formula would go something like:

        distance = initial speed * time + ( 1/2 ) * acceleration * time^2

        That would give you stopping distance for the rate of (negative) acceleration your car\brakes can do in an emergency. If that distance is longer than the distance between you and

    • Re:We SORELY Need this Technology in the US (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SerpentMage ( 13390 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:59AM (#12260493)
      This is exactly the kind of propaganda governments like to spew.

      1) Yes there are citizens who drive fast and follow too close. Just like there are citizens who smoke, eat too much, don't excercise, fart and burp in public. FACE reality, that is called humanity.

      2) Speeding tickets has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with making money in the government. Don't believe me? Check the revenue at the local law enforcement office.

      3) Hazardous driving like following too close, passing too tightly, which is on the books of as illegal, has no revenue stream. Yet these actions themselves are highly dangerous and CAUSE accidents. Why are cops not checking for these infractions? Simple, it means WORK, and the revenue earned is less than the effort required. Meaning its not a cash cow.

      4) Highway speeds are way too low. Why is it that in Germany you can drive as fast as you can, Switzerland is 120 KPH, Austria 130 KPH, France 130 KPH, Canada 100 KPH, and the US 90-110 KPH? So that means driving by the books in Germany gets you speed tickets most other places, driving by the book in France and Austria will get you tickets in Canada and the US? Come on, these are artificial limits setup so that MOST people people end up speeding.

      These days cars and highways for a large part have become safe enough for 150-160 KPH. And with electronic signs in many countries aspeed limit can be altered reflecting the conditions on the highway. Why is this not enforced? Simple, speed tickets = cash cow = simple way of saying, "We are tough on accidents". BS, BS, BS!!!
      • Just to disspell some of the mythical qualities of the German autobahn, while there is no general speed limit on the highway, very often there are signs indicating speed limits very much in line with the rest of the world. Very hard to say how much of the national highway network has a speed limit in place... 10%? 20%? 40%? Maybe someone else knows.

      • Hazardous driving like following too close, passing too tightly, which is on the books of as illegal, has no revenue stream. Yet these actions themselves are highly dangerous and CAUSE accidents. Why are cops not checking for these infractions? Simple, it means WORK, and the revenue earned is less than the effort required. Meaning its not a cash cow.

        You touch on an important point there. Here in NL, speeding tickets have become little more than a cash cow. Each district gets a quota for the nr. of tick

      • Re:We SORELY Need this Technology in the US (Score:5, Informative)

        by The Tyro ( 247333 ) * on Sunday April 17, 2005 @05:15AM (#12260696)
        I'm sorry, but I need to respond to this.

        Bringing up the police always seems to generate these "cops are all lazy, greedy, donut-eating, keeping-the-little-guy-down, tools-of-the-fascist-oppressors" posts.

        As a slashdotter with a background in law enforcement, I'll let you in on a little secret: with the exception of the highway patrol guys, most municipal/county cops HATE doing traffic. It's boring, repetitive, and most cops would much rather be doing something/anything else.

        Most police officers do NOT look on themselves as good little revenue-generators for their respective cities/mayors... the relationship is usually far, far more fractious and antagonistic than that. Besides, the individual cops don't get a cut of those tickets. There is little incentive to bust your butt, deal with the nasty attitudes of the people you stop, generate irate letters-to-the-editor in your local paper, all while doing something that you hate anyway. With the exception of a few small-town speedtraps (that have given other cops a black eye), most cops have better things to do than sit on their ass and write tickets all day.

        That said, a good knowledge of the traffic laws can serve you well. If you see someone acting suspiciously, their breaking of a traffic law gives you probable cause to stop them. Then, while writing their ticket, you look through the back window and see a gun and ski mask laying on the floor in the back seat (or you see the occupants madly stashing contraband as you execute your vehicle approach)

        BTW, the assured-clear-distance tickets, reckless operation citations, etc are finable offenses, so the "no revenue" accusation doesn't wash. Fact is, fewer of those offenses are ticketed because people take great pains not to commit them in front of police. You would not believe the difference in driver behavior, simply by comparing what you observe while driving your POV to what you observe while driving a marked cruiser.

        There's a reason the expression "driving like you've got a cop behind you" exists.

        • Of course they don't (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          "Most police officers do NOT look on themselves as good little revenue-generators for their respective cities/mayors"

          No, they don't. But the guys who run the force do.

          Believe me, if the money from speeding tickets never found its way back to the police budget, you'd see speed traps disappear immediately.

          I want to see cops patrolling, cops want to be patrolling, their bosses want to cover the budget. That's a fact.

          Besides, if speed limits were an absolute indicator of safety, then why do most cops driv
        • "BTW, the assured-clear-distance tickets, reckless operation citations, etc are finable offenses, so the "no revenue" accusation doesn't wash. Fact is, fewer of those offenses are ticketed because people take great pains not to commit them in front of police."

          This is only partly true. I have seen people run red lights in front of police officers. Nothing happened. I have seen them tailgate regularly in front of officers. Nothing happened. Of course, I have also seen them speed in front of officers regularl
          • One of the problems is the fact that almost everyone (if not everyone) breaks traffic laws at some point. But only a percentage are ticketed with negative consequences. This is a recipe for widespread dissatifaction. Of course, if they could ticket everyone, heads would roll (laws, speed limits, and elected officials would quickly change)....

            Which is why speed limits need to go away. A logical way of deterring bad drivers from causing harm would be to punish for harming someone. Like this:

            1st accident -
        • Fact is, fewer of those offenses are ticketed because people take great pains not to commit them in front of police. You would not believe the difference in driver behavior, simply by comparing what you observe while driving your POV to what you observe while driving a marked cruiser.

          The fact is, I have NEVER seen anyone get pulled over for say, not signaling... and I have seen it done in front of cops many times.

          At least in my area, they just don't care.
          Driving down the road a 65 on a nice day when

      • Re:We SORELY Need this Technology in the US (Score:4, Insightful)

        by LadyLucky ( 546115 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @05:16AM (#12260698) Homepage
        Speeding tickets has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with making money in the government. Don't believe me? Check the revenue at the local law enforcement office.

        That's the best part - it's a tax that you can avoid paying entirely. Don't speed, and you don't have to pay a penny, yet the police get billions in revenue.

        In my books, that's a great deal. The fact that my car (a beautiful 2003 Toyota Camry) has great efficiency at 90kph is just a fringe benefit too.

      • Actually, in Germany, many parts of the motorways do have speed limits, so it's not like you can drive as fast as you want *all* the time. ^_~

        That being said, though, you're quite right, and in fact, it seems to me that often enough, speed limits that really should be raised aren't, because not doing so means the state can make more money by occasionally handing out tickets to everyone.

        For example, over here, the (basic) speed limit for towns is 50 KPH (it can be lower (or sometimes higher) in certain are
      • because there isn't enough enforcement to make moderate speeding a negative stimulus.

        However, it is very well established that higher speeds cause more accidents and more and greater injuries, cause more wear on roads, and of course use more fuel.

        In the first two, many of the costs are born by directly by society, so people who obey the speed limit and non-drivers subsidize speeders.

        With a more automated system of negative stimulus like automated ticket assignments to speeders, this cost would be more fa
      • 2) Speeding tickets has nothing to do with safety, but everything to do with making money in the government. Don't believe me? Check the revenue at the local law enforcement office.

        If this were so, the last thing the authorities would want is a perfect speed enforcement system. If each car had a black box that snitched on the driver, each time he or she went 3 mph over the limit, then nobody would speed as evading fines would be impossible. The revenue stream would quickly dry up.

        To maximise revenue, a

  • It just seems like common sense that something like this would be a huge invasion of privacy. Is the government so strapped for cash that this is the only method of getting revenue that they can think of? Or am I missing something here?

    (Ignore the fact that speed can be recorded incorrectly due to tire size among other things.)
    • I am from the UAE. This (if true) is not a method to get cash and the government is definately not strapped for cash. We have some crazy drivers here.. and if this prove a successful way to control those idiots, then I can put up with such a system..
      • Which would be a better solution?

        1) Forcing everyone to have technology put in their cars to ticket them when they speed.

        2) Those caught speeding, first offense, fine, second offense, lose license for quite a long period of time.
  • Will take about 3 minutes. Enough said.

  • I can just see it now.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by victorhooi ( 830021 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @03:36AM (#12260402)
    System Error 0xFFF83: ILLEGAL OPERATION

    Warning: This user has performed an illegal operation, and will be booked now.

    DRIVER_IN_RED_SEDAN has caused an invalid page fault in module speeding_fines_are_a_cash_cow.dll at 0157:21114020

    Please save all your files, and pull over to the left-side of the road, and exit the vehicle. You may click the button "(*&#%)(*#$#@$#@ piece of c*ap" to view further details, or to see what will be sent to the Roads Revenue Collection Service about this incident. Click "Send Private Data" to send your private and confidential data to IBM, or alternatively, don't click anything, and we will do it anyway.

    Please have a nice day.

    ,

  • The article states there are some two million drivers but they're only going to install this into some thousand vehicles, so how do they determine who gets it and who doesn't? My guess is first or second time offenders would get them first similar to how criminals are released back into society but have to "check in" with local law enforcement every now and then or when they move they have to "register" with the local sheriff. I imagine there will be random checks to make sure the devices stay installed in
  • I can see the benefits of having a warning device telling you if you're going over the speed limit. There are lots of times I've thought to myself "hmmm, I wonder exactly what the speed limit is around here, I have not seen a sign". I've always thought it would be cool for the car to "know" what speed you should be driving at. If this device came around, I would jump at the chance to get one. On the other hand, the entire "speed and we will automatically issue you a ticket" idea is stupid. I don't want

  • in UAE? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by a.ameri ( 665846 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @04:25AM (#12260565)
    Well, the technology is good, I can think of hundreds of useful applications for it. But the privacy issues just scare the hell out of me. And, where? in UAE? If it was in a civilized democratic country, where there are restrictions on what a government can do, where there are unions and institutions which care about citizens' rights, then maybe the use of these applications can be justified. But in UAE?

    I lived in the UAE for more than 2 years. I had a very nice job there working at a multinational telecommunication company. Being and Iranian myself, it was a very good opportunity for me as my country was nearby and en route to other places, I could stop at my country a couple of times a year to say hello to my family. But there are things in that country which just scared the shit out of me. Things that eventually made me forget the job and the good opportunity it provided, and virtually escape from there.

    In UAE, a car's plate number can have variable number of digits. No 1 is reserved for the Sultan of the province (there are 7 provinces there, Dubai being the biggest one). No 2 is usually the Sultan's brother, and the 1 digit numbers are all family members of the sultan. Cousins and close friends get 2 digit numbers, as well as their wives and their children. The 3 digit numbers are also relatives of the relatives of Sultan. Ordinary cars have 5 digits on their plates.

    The situation is that no one can stand in the way of a lower-digit car. If you see a 2 or 3 digit car coming from the opposite direction, it doesn't matter if it's your line of road or not, you have to make way for him. The police can not issue tickets to these cars. They do not obey the speed limit; mostly they have Ferraris and Porches which easily pass the 180 mph, and no one can even stop them. Legally, the police can do nothing with them.

    They have all the money of the world. They have built bridges longer and more modern than those in Japan and Sweden, they have made skyscrapers that make New York look like a village, they have cars which automobile manufacturers hand made for their special needs. They have made a heaven out there. And if you just want to have some holiday, get on the beech, go to a resort or something; it is a perfect place. But only if you care nothing about the political situation, and the mentality of the people.

    There are no political parties. No Elections. No private newspaper, no private T.V channel, basically no free speech. The thing that surprised me was that unlike the people of my country, who also lack these things, but at least are fighting in order to get them; they even do not think about having a democratic society, having liberty, and privacy. It is as if these words do not exist in the dictionary of an ordinary Arab. They have been brought up with the mentality that you never question the ruler. They never criticize a single action of any governmental body; be it the municipality, or any other bureau. It was so shocking, and yet embarrassing to me.

    If this technology was being deployed in a democratic country, you would have had many organizations and groups voicing concerns over it. If did not prevent the deployment of such technology, they would have at least made sure that the necessary checks and restrictions on the storage and usage of information about every single car exists. As it is in the UAE, I'm sure no one will even question this thing. No one will even think about how this technology can be used to violate their rights and privacy. It doesn't matter how much money and oil they have and what kind of gadgets they use to control their traffic; when a society lacks basic elements like freedom of speech; that society will not evolve in a positive manner.
    • Democracies often have similar problems. Try driving in Washington, D.C. The mayor and his cronies have low-numbered plates. Then there are special plates for Senators, members of Congress, diplomats, diplomatic staff, etc. These people are almost immune from getting tickets. They might get temporarily detained if they mow down a troop of girl scouts while drunk. They park when and where they please. I used to live near an embassy and they would park their cars on the sidewalk of the street I lived on when
      • That, while unfortunate, is a side effect of the immunity granted to diplomats and MPs (members of parliament - I guess that means congresspeople and senators in the USA). And if you think about it, immunity does make sense, too; the ability of MPs to vote on laws, give speeches on political issues and all that without having to fear repercussions of any kind is an important aspect of democracy. Yeah, it unfortunately means that some (?) of them will abuse that by parking on the sidewalk and so on. But as

        • Re:in UAE? (Score:3, Insightful)

          by danila ( 69889 )
          You don't need to violate the immunity. But if the police would at least be allowed to make some stink, that would help. You know, send the ticket to their office (i.e. the embassador or to the Congress), inform the press, etc. I don't think a parking ticket can really harm the MP that much.

          And to think of it, do you seriously think that if the police had the right to enforce at least some modicum of order with those guys, that our democracy would be threatened? It doesn't make sense.

          The idea of immunity

    • Re:in UAE? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Mubarmij ( 176563 )
      Did you really live in the UAE? Your "facts" do not make me think so!

      Fist, car plate numbers:

      Car plates number are prestige symbols here (the smaller the number, the better). They are auctioned off to the highest bidders.

      As for the rest of your message, I am not going to waste my time refuting each and every point (there are private newspapers and TV channels BTW).

      For those interested, UAE is a federation of 7 Emirates (provinces). The largest of which is Abu Dhabi. All the 7 are ruled by dy

  • Corbin Dallas... (Score:3, Funny)

    by phreakmonkey ( 548714 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @04:29AM (#12260579) Homepage
    "You have five points remaining on your license..."

  • UAE (Score:2, Interesting)

    by djsamuraisam ( 874876 )
    i live there! this isnt a case of the government not having enough money, just do a google for burj dubai. they have money coming out of there fucking dicks. they have tonnes of oil. they even own madame tussads in england!. its simply that the traffic laws are a joke, no one uses their indicators, almost everyone speeds, people drive 20 kmph in a 90 zone, people drive 368 kmph in a 20 kmph zone. paired with the fact they have so much fucking money, that 18 year olds are getting ferrari's for their first

  • just can't wait (Score:5, Interesting)

    by maxpublic ( 450413 ) on Sunday April 17, 2005 @04:48AM (#12260627) Homepage
    I just can't wait for the day when all cars will be computerized and manual driving of any kind will be illegal. Then while I'm kicking back in my car drinking a coffee and listening to music while reading a book, I can think about all those enraged college students and idiot boomers fuming over the fact that they no longer get to endanger everyone else with their complete and total lack of skill...and smile.

    Hey, it's no different than legislating moronic things like seatbelt and helmet laws. If you think you have a moral imperative to act as my daddy, then I'll assume your position and bring it to its logical conclusion. And laugh at you every time you bitch about the 'good ol' days', when every stupid shit who insisted that *they* were great drivers put everyone else on the road at risk every time they got behind the wheel.

    Until that beautiful day, I'll back any bill that makes it a shooting offense for people to use their cell phones while driving. I swear to christ, those morons are as bad as any drunk....

    Max
  • I used to live in Bahrain, and like Bahrain, the UAE is full of drivers who break all sorts of speed limits (the cops simply didn't care there). Popular to contrary belief, while these countries may be "police states" in some aspects (ie. talking about the government), they turned a blind eye towards traffic laws and simple "crimes". You rarely found cops hiding in a designated place to catch speeders, like they do here in the US.

    Seems like the UAE govt. know this and are using another course of action to
  • I've been getting a lot of tickets lately and I've been thinking about a similar device that monitors my location and controls a speed limiter in my car that ensures I can't drive too fast.

    I'm not a great fan of government controls, so I'd like to be able to switch the device off if I want to and switch it on if I like to keep my eyes on the road instead of watching my speedometer all the time. Or maybe I could overclock it slightly...

    IMHO speed monitoring will get better and better in the coming years. H
  • Test in a small, rich draconian society systems that would get you sued a zillion ways from tomorrow in modern societies, then point to statistical improvements in safety and play the "homeland security" card (which will work for automated speeding ticket systems in a few years).

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close