Here are a couple of technical links about ALPR.
http://www.nditech.net/us/homelandsecurity/alpr/
http://www.pipstechnology.com/alpr/
One of the threads claims these uses:
Homeland Security special operations
Narcotics and drug interdiction
Border Patrol / enforcement
Covert / overt intelligence gathering
Red light enforcement
Stolen vehicle detection
Airport security
AMBER alerts
Surveillance
Criminal warrants
Counter-terrorism
Ports of entry
Theme park security
Perimeter security
Who remembers that a few years ago at the Super Bowel a “face recognition” technology was tested. I understand it was very (technically) successful but socially & politically incorrect.
This morning the
Today Show had a voicemail-to-email translator.
What if your new car (in addition tospeed, G-load, etc) also has GPS recording in the name of safety for accident recreation?
I agree with
DavidI that the technology has valid uses and is technically legal (when deployed in a public environment or with a legitimate court warrant.)
I am concerned for our ‘free’ society. When the technical ability exists to track and monitor your and my every movement (car), conversation and attendance; will it be used? I think so. The question is how.
What legal constraints should there be?
Another question is how those constraints should be enforced. I noticed reports of CIA/FBI agents refusing to interrogate “enemy combatants” for fear of being charged with war crimes.
We can’t make the technology disappear. We can require it to be used responsibly.
What if my face matches some criminal, I mention “terrorist” in a cell phone conversation, post on this thread, and I drive up to a
MoveOn meeting? Improperly used, all these technologies could have me ‘profiled.’
ALPR is just another technical piece of a very serious issue. I want to make sure these technologies
can’t be used improperly.
I think I may re-read Orwell.
Best,
Grady