Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday December 02 2019, @03:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the a-picture-is-worth-1000-words dept.

Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956

World-first mobile phone detection cameras rolled out in Australia

New South Wales rolled out mobile phone detection cameras on Sunday, hoping to cut the number of fatalities on its roads by a third over two years, transport authorities said.

The world-first mobile phone detection cameras, according to Transport for NSW, which manages the state's transport services, operate day and night in all weather conditions to determine if a driver is handling a mobile phone.

"It's a system to change the culture," the NSW police assistant commissioner, Michael Corboy, told Australian media last week.

[...] The mobile phone detection cameras use artificial intelligence to review images and detect illegal use of the devices, Transport for NSW said in a statement.

Images that the automated system identifies as likely to contain a driver illegally using a mobile phone are verified by authorised personnel.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday December 02 2019, @03:24PM (11 children)

    by PiMuNu (3823) on Monday December 02 2019, @03:24PM (#927151)

    I realise that the aims are very worthy. But my anti-fascist/software testing brain just wants to drive around in circles past these cameras holding a black square cardboard box to my ear to see how many irate letters from the police I can generate.

    Shame I live on the wrong side of the world.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @03:29PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @03:29PM (#927154)

      I agree but, the problem is actually people using apps (not calls). In traffic here in the DC area, literally every driver is using apps on their phone. As a pedestrian or bicyclist you are taking your life into your hands. 100% of drivers are looking down away from the road and glancing up every few seconds.

      Something has to give. It is a serious cultural problem here.

      • (Score: 2) by legont on Monday December 02 2019, @06:30PM (1 child)

        by legont (4179) on Monday December 02 2019, @06:30PM (#927245)

        One of the apps is google maps which, in it's wise incarnation, even shows adds. Yes, it does this during stops, but I'd assume drivers are clicking on the adds and continue reading.

        --
        "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @10:47PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @10:47PM (#927398)

          I've had to try to click them off which is very distrating when I'm trying to drive. Especially if I'm on a red light and the stupid ad pops up and the light turns green and I have to try and click it off. What genius thought this was a good idea I have no clue.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @03:55PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @03:55PM (#927173)

      Also on the wrong side of the world...

      Don't own a cell/mobile phone or device, but I do have one ear that always seems to be itchy. I suspect that raising my hand and scratching my ear would be enough to trigger this dumb pattern-matching system.

      • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday December 02 2019, @04:39PM (3 children)

        by PiMuNu (3823) on Monday December 02 2019, @04:39PM (#927197)

        TFS says artificial intelligence! You know, the tech that almost wiped out the world in, like, 4 Terminator movies. Are you saying that Arnold Schwarzenegger or that blonde lass would be fooled by scratching your ear, because you better have some pretty good evidence to back that one up...

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @05:21PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @05:21PM (#927218)

          I get your sarcasm, and yes, I converted "artificial intelligence" to "pattern matching" for my post about scratching my ear--because that is what I think it really is.

          Now, if the detection system actually listened for moving sources of cell phone frequencies and picked out offenders that way (adding in all the users of hands-free), that would be another thing. Newer cars that are always calling home (Tesla?) might generate false alarms(??)

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @05:23PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @05:23PM (#927220)

          On a more serious note, the phrase "artificial intelligence" is seen frequently in many fields of endeavor, referring to algorithms (predefined procedures), data store (such as database or neural net) access, or a combination of the two.

          Problem is, that's algorithms and/or data store access, not intelligence of any sort.

          Merriam-Webster, for example, calls intelligence [merriam-webster.com] "the ability to apply knowledge to... think abstractly" and "the act of understanding : comprehension." There exists no "AI" that does these things. They have added "the ability to perform computer functions" as an (ironic) additional definition, but not "intelligent functions."

          There is not something intelligent, with understanding knowledge of people, cell phones, and cars, patrolling and profiling the drivers of New South Wales. Rather, it's some algorithms tied to a database of pictures and data points bringing drivers to the attention of the cops. That's probably not good for anyone. I certainly doubt such a system's ability to reduce fatalities by a third.

          I hope earnestly that the program succeeds in its safety goals while protecting the privacy of innocent Australians.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @11:34PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @11:34PM (#927418)

            Supposedly one thing humans do that computers can't do is science. We can make an observation, form a hypothesis, test it (search for supporting and contradicting evidence) and draw a conclusion.

            If I see a poster on the wall I know, from experience, that someone probably put it there because I've seen people put posters on walls in the past. So if you asked me how it got there I would likely say that someone put it there. The computer woudln't know the answer to such a question from past experience unless someone specifically programmed the answer into it.

            Can a computer, for instance, observe a car hitting another car or hitting an object, observe the damage caused, later notice damage to antoher unrelated car and, if asked how the damage likely got there tell me, only from past experience and not from being preprogrammed to do so, that the damage was likely caused by a collison. Bonus points if it can assess if the car likely hit an object or another car from experience alone (ie: if there is a different color paint on the car it likely came from another car but if there is a brick color on the car and it can see that the brick wall nearby has evidence of a collision then can it tell me that the car likely hit the nearby brick wall instead). On top of that we can assess who was likely at fault in the case of two cars colliding (or about how much blame each party holds) and what can be done to prevent such accidents.

            We make an observervation (damage on car). Draw a hypothesis (this is likely caused by a collision). Look for supporting evidence (past experience of damage caused by collisions). Draw a conclusion (a collision is plausible). Computer don't do this, not yet anyways. Computers only recognize patterns we tell them to recognize.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @04:38PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @04:38PM (#927196)

      It may look like I'm using a cellphone while driving but... How many tickets will I get for picking the earwax out of my canals?

      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @09:24PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @09:24PM (#927352)

        As many as they can issue until you get your ass into court to prove you're innocent. Guilty until proven innocent, that's how we roll down under.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Osamabobama on Monday December 02 2019, @05:42PM

      by Osamabobama (5842) on Monday December 02 2019, @05:42PM (#927226)

      I was thinking an absurd sculpture of mannequin arms radiating from the driver's seat, each holding a small object. Maybe the steering wheel could be adorned with sets of fake fingers, to approximate the look of at least two hands on the wheel at any time.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by The Shire on Monday December 02 2019, @03:26PM (10 children)

    by The Shire (5824) on Monday December 02 2019, @03:26PM (#927153)

    Any excuse to put cameras on the population. First it was "think of the children" (while the elite ran pedophile rings and the media ran cover for them).

    Then it was cameras on the streets "To protect the population from crime" (while merely recording crimes rather than preventing them and becoming an excuse not to have police walking a beat)

    Now it's peering inside your car while you drive (while giving police an excuse to profile drivers and pull them over for any slight infraction - never mind if you are driving safely)

    Also proposed in the US: All cars built after 2021 may be required to have a camera that watches the driver at all times "looking for signs of the driver not paying attention"

    Watch for Amazon Echo style devices to become mandatory in homes to "to prevent domestic abuse".

    Hell, even Elon Musk was hawking a brain implant device that monitors your emotional state. What is this, the rise of the Cyber Men?

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday December 02 2019, @03:31PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 02 2019, @03:31PM (#927155) Journal

      Elon Musk was hawking a brain implant device that monitors your emotional state.

      The RIAA / MPAA will be the force that drives mandatory brain implants. That way your credit card can be properly charged any time you unintentionally or casually hear or see anything copyrighted. Think of the poor artists record and movie companies!

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by ilsa on Monday December 02 2019, @03:52PM (3 children)

      by ilsa (6082) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 02 2019, @03:52PM (#927168)

      Distracted driving has proven far more dangerous than any other form of impaired driving. I haven't tried crunching the numbers, but I would guess that it's close to, if not worse, than all other forms of impair driving combined.

      And the situation is just going to get worse as long as this attitude of acceptability exists. Education isn't working. Even increased fines arn't working. If people flat out refuse to take responsibility for their themselves, what form of escalation is appropriate without becoming Orwellian?

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by The Shire on Monday December 02 2019, @04:00PM (1 child)

        by The Shire (5824) on Monday December 02 2019, @04:00PM (#927176)

        Surveillance is not the solution. When they decided to implement red light cameras they were instantly abused for profit to the point of actually modifying yellow light times below legal requirements in order to trap people in the intersection.

        Surveillance like this is just another kind of speed trap. They'll watch for your phone, your seatbelt, maybe you have a sandwich in your hand or you happen to be looking down at your radio when the shot was taken. This is a gold mine for police looking to cash in on minor infractions. And road stops can quickly turn into a search of your car and all your posessions on the flimsy basis of "probably cause" (a violation of constitutional rights here in the US).

        The benefits do not outweight the harms.

        • (Score: 3, Touché) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday December 02 2019, @08:58PM

          by fido_dogstoyevsky (131) <axehandleNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday December 02 2019, @08:58PM (#927334)

          ...When they decided to implement red light cameras they were instantly abused for profit to the point of actually modifying yellow light times below legal requirements in order to trap people in the intersection...

          Maybe in the Democratic Nationalist People's Republic of USA.

          ... They'll watch for your phone, your seatbelt, maybe you have a sandwich in your hand or you happen to be looking down at your radio when the shot was taken...

          All of which have consequences if you are driving and seen by a carbon based walloper.

          --
          It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @08:14PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @08:14PM (#927317)

        Completely fixing it would cost money, so its more profitable to just fine people.

        1. Mandatory issue everyone a brand new car complete with automated driver

    • (Score: 2) by Spamalope on Monday December 02 2019, @04:10PM

      by Spamalope (5233) on Monday December 02 2019, @04:10PM (#927184) Homepage

      Not just cameras, but sweet sweet fines.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by boltronics on Tuesday December 03 2019, @02:31AM (3 children)

      by boltronics (580) on Tuesday December 03 2019, @02:31AM (#927485) Homepage Journal

      Oh come on. Australia has over 1000 people die [wikipedia.org] on the road every year from vehicle deaths. It's practically guaranteed that this will save hundreds or perhaps even thousands of lives - depending on how long it takes for cars to become completely driver-less.

      As for privacy - you're in a car on a public road, and it's illegal to make your window tinting too dark. What kind of privacy are you seriously expecting?

      There will never be mandatory Amazon Echo-style devices in your own home because your home is a private place. That's just stupid. I'm someone who covers my PlayStation and laptop cameras, but I'm all for more cameras on roads - as a cyclist who has been crashed into by a car who's driver was not paying attention, and had many other near misses for the same reason.

      --
      It's GNU/Linux dammit!
      • (Score: 2) by The Shire on Friday December 06 2019, @01:35AM (2 children)

        by The Shire (5824) on Friday December 06 2019, @01:35AM (#928706)

        Time will tell, however my bet is two things will occur: 1) No lives will be saved, people will continue to be idiots only some will now get tickets for being idiots. And 2) You will see a dramatic increase in people getting pulled over for non cell phone related issues that appear on the camera shots. The police have to pay for the fancy cameras they just deployed and they do that by pulling over everyone for even the most minor reasons, sometimes for no reason at all - you just "look suspicious" to the cop. And they will seize your money as possible "drug related cash", or seize your vehicle because their drug dog got a "hit" that he was totally trained to do on command.

        Two many humans become absolute trash when given power over others. And power over everyone on the road is what these cameras are offering. It's happened before, it's been documented and litigated, but they are always trying to find somewhere else to play the same game.

        • (Score: 2) by boltronics on Friday December 13 2019, @01:24AM (1 child)

          by boltronics (580) on Friday December 13 2019, @01:24AM (#931590) Homepage Journal

          Haha OMG. You must be from the USA.

          --
          It's GNU/Linux dammit!
          • (Score: 2) by The Shire on Friday December 13 2019, @04:16AM

            by The Shire (5824) on Friday December 13 2019, @04:16AM (#931629)

            I'd rather be an American, warts and all, than from any other nation in the world.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by bart on Monday December 02 2019, @03:46PM (3 children)

    by bart (2844) on Monday December 02 2019, @03:46PM (#927162)

    We had a proof of concept 4 months ago in the Netherlands.

    https://tweakers.net/nieuws/157980/politie-zet-ai-cameras-in-om-automobilisten-met-telefoon-in-hand-te-beboeten.html [tweakers.net]

    Oh 'An me hoela' is Dutch slang, indicating something like 'what a load of bollocks'

    • (Score: 2) by The Shire on Monday December 02 2019, @03:53PM (2 children)

      by The Shire (5824) on Monday December 02 2019, @03:53PM (#927170)

      I'm adding that phrase to my repertoire, however being first to a new surveillance technique isn't necessarily a point of pride.

      • (Score: 2) by bart on Monday December 02 2019, @03:59PM (1 child)

        by bart (2844) on Monday December 02 2019, @03:59PM (#927175)

        I actually agree about the new Big Brother techniques.

        I am however strongly agreeing with getting mobile phone users away from the steering wheel.

        • (Score: 2) by The Shire on Friday December 06 2019, @01:40AM

          by The Shire (5824) on Friday December 06 2019, @01:40AM (#928708)

          The technical fix would simply mandating that hand held phones disconnect when they detect speeds in excess of 25mph. This would inconvenience passengers as well but better that than more public surveillance.

  • (Score: 2) by legont on Monday December 02 2019, @06:40PM (6 children)

    by legont (4179) on Monday December 02 2019, @06:40PM (#927258)

    Will AI be brave enough to stop this or will it be afraid of diversity?
    More seriously, people drink hot beverages, eat, do their eyes, read books, and get blowjobs while driving - seen all of it myself - which is more dangerous than talking. Going after cell phones in hands is simply the biggest target at the moment. If successful, they will move after other activities.
    I can imagine a system that detects from a distance when driver movers her eyes off the road and tickets her. At this point everybody will beg for an AI driver - acceptance problem solved.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @06:52PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @06:52PM (#927275)

      When I had a step-van with sliding door, I could stand up in the footwell, open the door and pee without stopping. Did this plenty of times on empty freeways at night, no problem. Stand on the left foot, right foot on the gas, steer with the right hand and aim with the left!

      • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @08:26PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @08:26PM (#927323)

        And people always wondered why the left side of your van never seemed to have any road dirt on it.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @01:44AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @01:44AM (#927468)

          Ha, ha, good one. However, the blunt nose of that van, not far in front of the door (cab far forward) meant that the airflow there was well separated and still angling away from the body. Never saw any sign of splashing on the side of the van, the airstream carried it all away.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @09:30PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 02 2019, @09:30PM (#927357)

      While I agree with your logic, the fact is those other cases you mention have always been in the less than 20% bucket, yet folks using phones, whether it is on a call or checking their IG/FB/SC or next round of angry birds or battle royale is definitely more than the 20% bucket - at least in my neck of the woods.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @01:46AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @01:46AM (#927470)

        Does doing your make-up give you a big dopamine hit? Supposedly the video game designers are trying for this effect and that may explain why phones/games are more distracting than the more traditional things that people do in cars (in addition to driving)?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @11:13AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03 2019, @11:13AM (#927595)

          Why would I care about this dopamine thing ?

(1)