Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Tracking Traffic Jams With Cell Phones

Posted by kdawson on Sun Nov 05, 2006 07:23 PM
from the eye-in-the-tower dept.
Privacy Wireless Networking Hardware
kaufmanmoore writes, "Companies and governments are looking to alternatives to expensive radars and road sensors to track traffic jams. Two Atlanta-based companies are aiming to use data from wireless carriers to mark how fast phones are moving and overlaying that with maps to calculate traffic conditions. One of the companies, AirStage, has already partnered with Sprint-Nextel and the Georgia DOT to cover Atlanta's notorious traffic. The plans raise obvious privacy concerns over the usage of the data of your cell phone's location and the accuracy of this data." From the article: "[The] systems rely on wireless companies allowing them to process the data from their towers that calculate the position of each phone about twice a second when it's being used and once every 30 seconds when it's not. [One company's technology] can track vehicles to within 330 feet without using Global Positioning System satellites. Its software is designed to weed out the difference between pedestrians and drivers, then crunch it into detailed color-coded maps that show average speeds along roadways."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived.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.

Tracking Traffic Jams With Cell Phones 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Superman (Score:3, Funny)

    by Esion Modnar (632431) on Sunday November 05 2006, @07:27PM (#16729721)
    If he had a cellphone, this could really screw things up.

    • If he had a cellphone, this could really screw things up.

      Here in Atlanta, in whatever traffic condition, jam, whatever it is, you will STILL see someone on a cellular phone, weaving and going about 90MPH.

      By the way, Atlanta is already well-covered. Lots of people whom I know make use of this map [georgia-navigator.com]. I wonder what the GDOT could have up their sleeves with this project.

    • Leatherface had a cell phone, he could, too... Oh. wait...
  • I'd be interested if somebody has done a study to determine how much additional throughput is gained by giving X% of drivers congestion information. My guess is it would do more to reduce the variance of travel times than it would to reduce the average travel time.

    • I'd be interested if somebody has done a study to determine how much additional throughput is gained by giving X% of drivers congestion information. My guess is it would do more to reduce the variance of travel times than it would to reduce the average travel time. It would depend entirely on the amount of traffic. In god-awful places like the Los Angeles area, knowing there's an exceptional traffic jam doesn't help, as any and all alternate routes are already filled to capacity under "normal" conditions. I

    • I'd be interested if somebody has done a study to determine how much additional throughput is gained by giving X% of drivers congestion information. My guess is it would do more to reduce the variance of travel times than it would to reduce the average travel time.

      It would depend entirely on the amount of traffic. In god-awful places like the Los Angeles area, knowing there's an exceptional traffic jam doesn't help, as any and all alternate routes are already filled to capacity under "normal" conditions. I

    • I'd be interested if somebody has done a study to determine how much additional throughput is gained by giving X% of drivers congestion information. My guess is it would do more to reduce the variance of travel times than it would to reduce the average travel time.

      As much as it seems a given that "You're going to have to drive home anyway", if you're in a situation where you can take advantage of the couple hours you'd otherwise spend in a traffic jam, being able to discover abnormal traffic ahead of time i
    • What's the use of reducing the average travel time if some days it takes you 9 minutes, and other days takes you 33? Doesn't matter if my average commute is only 16 minutes, I have to leave 33 minutes before work every day to make sure I'm not late. Some days I get there 24 minutes early. I'd appreciate anything that can reduce the standard travel time deviation.
    • You are starting with the assumption thatto study the traffic flow has a direct practical pupose. Silly person! This research is designed to be slick, ingenious, quantifieable, and aimed like a laser as the two basic needs: 1 a grant to cover it, and 2 a opening of that age old phrase somewhere warmly tucked into the conclusion: "This demonstrates the need for further study". Thus demonstrating the need for an additional grant.

  • Watchin ME or watching THERE? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by icebike (68054) * on Sunday November 05 2006, @07:30PM (#16729743)
    If the phone companies strip identifying information from data one might be
    tempted to think there is no problem in making this information available.

    However, the privacy concern may not be limited to the ability track a specific phone, which they would probably require court permission to do.

    There are lots other uses, and abuses of such technology, such as finding where tonight's big party is located, which local watering hole is over-capacity, how much traffic the local liquour store (or street corner dealer) is getting.

    Even if such uses were void of personal data, they provide data about the location,
    whether that be a private home or a business.
    • There are lots other uses, and abuses of such technology, such as finding where tonight's big party is located, which local watering hole is over-capacity, how much traffic the local liquour store (or street corner dealer) is getting.

      If you're worried, turn off your cell phone. If you're *really* worried, remove the phone's battery. I keep mine off while driving anyway because I tend not to want to be disturbed nor tempted into picking up a call *now*. If they need to, clients can leave a voicemail,

      • > Cell phones can be turned off if the user doesn't wish to be tracked.

        You managed to miss the entire focus of my post in your rush to reply.

        I was commenting on the fact that I, You, We, may allow violation of privacy of other entities merely by walking in with a cell phone, EVEN IF our personal identity were protected by the cell phone company.

        When 400 phones show up in a club with a capacity rating of 350, can cops and fire marshals be far behind?
        • When 400 phones show up in a club with a capacity rating of 350, can cops and fire marshals be far behind?

          This system is claimed to have a 300-foot resolution. Not real useful in telling which building exactly people are in, nor if they're inside or standing outside having a smoke.

          -b.

        • So you're saying the highway has a right to privacy? I understand the spirit of your assertion, but the technology already exists--phones are already tracked and have been for years. This simply puts that data to use. The system is no good for crowd control--not at 100 meter resolution. The potential for abusing that data has existed for years and will continue to exist.

          There's nothing wrong about a system that indicates that there are x people within 100 meters of point y. There is very little real
        • What would you do if all cars had the transponders and they were not mandated?

          If they'd not be mandated and there was no legal consequence for turning the transponder off or making it unable to communicate, I'd simply turn mine off. It's doable with things like On*Star from GM, and I'd rather take the infinitisimal risk of running off the road, hitting a tree and bleeding to death before an ambulance comes than be tracked all the time. As long as it's not mandated by law and there's no consequence othe

  • How long 'til it's used to ticket me for speeding without the hassle of actually putting a cop at the corner?
    • This is being done in Houston right now using the RFID toll road tags. http://traffic.houstontranstar.org/layers/ [houstontranstar.org] However, the second they start writing tickets, all of Houston dumps the RFID tags, and they have to hire a LOT of toll both operators. The same thing will happen to the phones. The phone companies will not cooperate with anything that will encourage people to turn off there phones.
  • Wow, this might just be a record. Maybe not all exactly the same thing, but still the same idea :)

    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/14 3247 [slashdot.org]
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/10/23 37259 [slashdot.org]
    http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/ 01/159241 [slashdot.org]
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/07 45248 [slashdot.org]
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/30/124324 7 [slashdot.org]
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/16/076217 [slashdot.org]

    Congratulations Slashdot, on having sextuplets (though maybe there are other, lost s

  • Are you fucking kidding me? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Pink Tinkletini (978889) on Sunday November 05 2006, @07:39PM (#16729813) Homepage
    How many times does this article need to be duped on Slashdot?
    1. Tracking Traffic Jams With Cell Phones
      http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/05/22 20211 [slashdot.org]

    2. Tracking Your Cell Phone for Traffic Reports
      http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/10/23 37259 [slashdot.org]

    3. Baltimore to Test Cell Phone Traffic Monitoring
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/143247 [slashdot.org]

    4. Cell Phones to Monitor Traffic Flow
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/19/074524 8 [slashdot.org]

    5. Using Cell Phones to Track Traffic
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/01/159241 [slashdot.org]

    6. Tracking Cell Phones for Real-Time Traffic Data
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/16/076217 [slashdot.org]

    7. Finns To Use Cell Phones To Monitor Traffic Jams
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/30/124324 7 [slashdot.org]

    8. Using Cellular Traffic to Monitor Traffic Jams
      http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/13/042822 9 [slashdot.org]
  • Its software is designed to weed out the difference between pedestrians and drivers, then crunch it into detailed color-coded maps that show average speeds along roadways.

    I doubt they even have to employ this software in LA. From what I hear, nobody walks in LA. (I won't be fooled by a cheap cinematic trick, It must have been just a cardboard cut out of a man, Top-forty cast off from a record stand.)
  • When our presence, our body is being used for commercial gain we should be getting a cut.... a kickback for opting in to be a part of the service. Cellular companies nickel and dime us to death with various 'services' that should be part of the standard package and then they get to resell us as data to some 3rd party without giving us something back??? I say no.
  • Cool site that goes live tomorrow.

    mobi.traffic.com [traffic.com]

    I imagine this won't survive Slashdot, but please destroy it(I need some numbers:-). This is not meant for a web browser to all people who will say that it looks ugly in Firefox.

  • Equally as likely would be the reverse. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lethyos (408045) on Sunday November 05 2006, @08:54PM (#16730293) Journal

    “Causing Traffic Jams With Cell Phones”

    Once someone has an accident you can all report the incident and resulting congestion right away!

  • Someone needs to come up with a checklist for why [someone's technical solution for avoiding traffic jams] is [impractical/unworkable/unacceptable] like I have seen here on Slashdot for spam. It seems we constantly hear about some new proposal for eliminating traffic jams, yet none of them ever come to fruition. I'll throw out some general reasons why:

    1. The solution generally assumes that everyone opts-in. This is impossible. Not everyone is going to buy a new device to assist in traffic tracking. If an ex
  • As somebody who current lives in Atlanta, I'm still trying to figure out how this is going to benefit me. The traffic question in Atlanta isn't one that can be solved by planning alternate routes around large traffic jams. The problem here is that the traffic is everywhere and at the right (wrong?) time of day there really is no good alternate route that isn't congested. Atlanta growth has far outstripped its ability to build the necessary road infrastructure to handle the traffic. What they really need
    • The problem with Atlanta is that some dumbass decided that taking two interstates and merging them together downtown was a grand old idea.

      Then a new group of dumbasses decided that the problem wasn't fucked up enough and they decided to throw a major highway into that merge as well.

      Depending on when I leave the house in the morning, it can take me 45 minutes to an hour to go from Northridge on 400 to 14th street where I exit. God forbid someone spills a coke on the road in which case that commute is now 2 h
  • Its software is designed to weed out the difference between pedestrians and drivers

    So how does that work? Any sufficiently slow-moving vehicle is indistinguishable from a pedestrian. Hell, sometimes pedestrians are moving faster than the traffic.

    Although it's difficult to say whether or not it's even necessary, since if all phones in a certain area are moving at 2-3MPH, it's more likely due to traffic than, say, no cars on the road. Maybe not at 2AM (except on New Years), but that shouldn't be hard to ac
    • If two phones are moving down the same street and one is going much faster than the other, then you can probably assume the slower of the two is a pedestrian.

      If a phone is moving the wrong way down a one way street then it's a pedestrian (or elderly driver)

      Pedestrians tend to move at a much more regular speed in urban areas. Sure they have to stop at lights, but they keep moving steadily whereas traffic jam traffic is usually stop/start.

      Once you've identified a phone as a pedestrian then you can exclude it'
  • Great. It's bad enough that I just got a $400 ticket issued by a camera, but now my phone is going to be able to give me speeding tickets, too?
    • It seems we should turn off the cell phone when not using it.

      Nah, go the other direction: let's have every vacuous twit in North America calling every other one while driving, and then start cascading the accidents to the point that nothing moves.

      This will trivialize the traffic analysis problem.
        • Well, if they implement this, as a sprintpcs customer....till my contract runs out, I'll be shutting off my phone, and taking the battery out while driving.

          I paid too much for my radar detector, and CB to just get an automated speeding ticket by cell phone. I know this first one can't resolve to get you yet...but, they will.....they will.

          And we all know how the cops and govt. would salivate over automating the "collect and serve" practices of today.

    • Automated speeding tickets will show up on your cell phone bill.

      How do you differentiate between the cell phone of a driver, a car passenger, and a bus passenger? Besides, EZ-Pass has had this capability for years, yet they aren't using it because people would refuse to use the system. (The only exception is that they ticket for speeding through the toll plazas themselves, presumably because workers could get hit.)

      -b.

    • The pedestrians are moving.

      *ba-dum-CHING*

      ... okay, actually, this is pretty easy. If you can get them to only pay attention to certain streets (like 75/85 or whatever I-number you like), then pedestrians are, if anything, moving perpendicular to the flow of traffic.

      All things considered, I was always told I could be tracked by my cell phone, and I consider it a safety feature more than an invasive detail. And considering I'm a liberal, that's saying a lot.
    • If there are signals travelling 80mph and signals travelling 4mph (and that's a good run/jog), then clearly the flow is at 80 mph.

      If there are only signals travelling 4 mph, then clearly the traffic is stalled. Figuring out exactly which signal is which isn't important.

      Pedestrians aren't the problem. The problem would be a parallel street within the error margin (common because highways are often basically run right over old popular routes, and sometimes the old popular routes are still there, so you can ge

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Silver Gryphon (928672)
        Also... roads don't change their location (except during a 10.5 in California). Overlay movement data to road maps. Picture cell phones in dots on a screen. If you see a flow of dots on a screen, moving at > 20mph at any point in time, that's a road. Track one dot; if it slows down and then goes > 5mph, it's still on a road. If it stays under 3mph while others move faster, it's now a pedestrian or otherwise disqualified from the flow.

        Privacy issues are not as bad as people think; anyone with a GP
    • "So, how does one differentiate between pedestrians and cars in a traffic jam?"

      Outside of L.A. you could determine that by whether or not they're on a sidewalk.
    • What we really need is fewer roads, fewer cars, more restrictions on driving, and more public transit. It looks likely that Bloomberg's administration will spend its last years following London's example [streetsblog.org], perhaps even going so far as to turn whole sections of Manhattan into pedestrian-only zones. Making it easier to get around the city can only be good for the regional economy, and personally, I'm all for it.
      • It looks likely that Bloomberg's administration will spend its last years following London's example, perhaps even going so far as to turn whole sections of Manhattan into pedestrian-only zones.

        Just please don't institute the *fucking obnoxious* system of congestion charging that Red Kenny Livingstone saw fit to introduce in London. Using automated cameras to recognize and record license plates has major privacy implications. And there's already a working system of congestion charging for vehicles enter

        • You think anyone should use London as an example of a sane public transport system? And yes it's still a crap place to live.

          Replace London with Britain actually. You'd think with all of the bizarre laws that are being put in place in Britain these days (ASBOs, banning of anything even remotely dangerous, etc) that Guy Fawkes had the right idea nearly 400 years ago.

          A penny for the old guy,

          -b.

    • We need MORE roads, LESS cars, and another tunnel into Manhattan.

      1/3 of your statement is correct.
    • It's like those radio traffic alerts on I-78, US-1/9 and other routes into NYC...as soon as people here there is a jam on 78, all the cars are on 1/9 and you create another traffic jam. It's an unstable routing algorithm. The real answer came to me in a dream. We need MORE roads, LESS cars, and another tunnel into Manhattan.

      There's a lot of room for improvement without pushing more roads through. For example, the approaches to the Holland Tunnel could be converted into either an elevated or a depressed f

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.