[From Shops track customers via mobile phone - Times Online ]
An article on Path Intelligence, which offers the ability to track shoppers through malls. They do this by measuring signals from a shopper’s cell phone with several monitoring units. This technology is installed in several malls in the UK. The benefits are:
A shopping mall could, for example, find out that 10,000 people were still in the store at 6pm, helping to make a case for longer opening hours, or that a majority of customers who visited Gap also went to Next, which could useful for marketing purposes. In the case of Gunwharf Quays, managers were surprised to discover that an unusually high percentage of visitors were German – the receivers can tell in which country each phone is registered – which led to the management translating the instructions in the car park.
The technology relies on the IMEI code for a cell phone. IMEI is a unique number given to each cell phone. Supposedly, only the phone network can match a handset IMEI to the personal details of the customer. (I don’t know how this approach compares to cell phones used for monitoring traffic congestion.)
This is another example of a smart system used for marketing purposes.
rshah Applications
[From Plan to use private cameras to help city surveillance :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Politics]
Mayor Daley is sponsoring an ordinance that would authorize the “city’s Office of Emergency Management and Communications to reach out en masse to private businesses and sign agreements with them to share video from their privately-owned surveillance cameras.”
This type of partnership has been done in other countries, but I don’t know of any large scale programs in the United States. There are a number of issues that need to be addressed if the government is monitoring private cameras, which may be focused on either public or private areas.
From a technology side, it will be interesting how this is implemented (and how much it costs). It appears to rely on a hardware based VPN system. The city has said:
The public-private hook-up was made possible by software tied to Operation Virtual Shield. That’s the security grid that linked existing fiber optics into a single network and paved the way for hundreds more surveillance cameras, sophisticated software capable of spotting suspicious behavior and for mass transit cameras to be monitored by the 911 center.
“You’ll have a piece of network gear that will talk to a piece of network gear from us and, through software, we’ll establish that point-to-point relationship on a dedicated pipe that’s talking language only you and I can talk….What we’ll do is ride the Internet. It’ll be fully-encrypted video” that cannot be compromised by hackers, Argiropoulos said.
As with other efforts by Chicago, if this is successful, expect other cities to follow. I hope to follow this more closely and provide a legal/technical analysis of this issues as they arise.
rshah Chicago, Policy
[From City expects $50M. in red-light fines :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Metro & Tri-State]
An update on red light cameras in Chicago. There are 104 cameras in action with 25 more planned for this year. The city will collect more than $50 million in fines this year. (The sum of the previous four years was $35 million). The cameras are having an effect according to the OEMC.
Second, accidents are down 30 percent in the camera-covered intersections, and red-light running is down 60 percent, according to numbers provided by the city. And since the cameras also stand watch against illegal right turns on red, pedestrian injuries from such turns have also declined, according to Martinez.
The data provided seems to be the same numbers as provided back in March. See here for that update on red light cameras in chicago.
rshah Chicago, Red Light Cameras
[From Is Public CCTV Effective? : IP Video Market Info]
John has synthesized a number of the papers on CCTV’s effectiveness on crime. His work is careful and measured on a topic that is highly polarizing. Its a must read and I share many of John’s views. He has also been very helpful in providing links to the papers he reviewed. At some point, I would like to do a detailed post on his review (as well as see if I can add more papers). But for now, here are some of the key findings.
The expectation that CCTV systems should be deployed to reduce crime rather than solve crime has created huge problems. –
While the studies show serious doubt on CCTV’s ability to reduce crime generally, a strong consensus exists in CCTV’s ability to reduce premeditative/property crime
CCTV is consistently treated as a singular, stable technology, obscuring radical technological changes that have occurred in the last 10 years
Routine comparison of police vs cameras is counterproductive
This leads him to conclude:
Stop claiming that CCTV can generally reduce crime
Optimize future public CCTV projects around crime solving rather than crime reduction
Optimize future public CCTV projects around material and premeditative crimes
rshah Policy
[From Views From Both Sides On The Use Of Red Light Cameras] via the Beat The Traffic Blog
Supporters of red light cameras say…
- According to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS), drivers who run red lights account for 22% of all traffic accidents in the United States.
- An IIHS study in Oxnard, California showed that red light running violations dropped 42% after red light cameras was introduced. A similar study in Fairfax, Virginia showed violations declined 40% after one year after.
- Publicity of red light cameras deters violations.
- Red light cameras don’t have biases and therefore drivers cannot be unfairly profiled.
- Privacy issues are null because of the public setting. Also, only people violating the law are photographed.
- They make lots of money for cities in need of the revenue.
Those who oppose the use of red light cameras say . . .
- The owner might not have been driving the car, yet they are mailed owner the ticket.
- Cameras increase other types of accidents, such as rear ending collisions, when people notice the camera and make hasty decisions to avoid ticketing. A Virginia Transportation Research Council study shows an increase of accidents with the installment of red light cameras.
- Longer yellow lights can make intersections much safer, in an easy and inexpensive way (check out the findings of the Texas Transportation Institute)
- There is no standardization of yellow light duration and several cities have been caught shortening them around a red light camera to increase revenue.
- Insurance companies (including IIHS) support red light cameras because more tickets mean they can raise insurance rates
- The accused receive notification weeks after the violation and there are no human witnesses to analyze the whole situation.
- They are expensive to operate and service the tickets in our court system.
- There are not stands to the fines through the U.S. which range from $50-$400.
Update, Chad Dornsife of Best Highway Safety Practices Institute offers his own analysis that red light cameras are not needed, see the top story at Highway Safety Group.
rshah Policy, Red Light Cameras
Recent Comments