|
The problem with GIS user input seems to me to be that the user is a person who may not want to put input into the system. For example a person who is a hiker might consider writing a book about his favorites spots in the mountains. But then after publishing the book he regrets revealing his secrets to the public because he now finds that his quite spots become overrun with new hikers. Why? Because he told them about the places in the book.
The same would be true about GIS for motor traffic. Publishing the data on what routes are faster to get from hither to tither results in those faster routes being advertised. People who need to go between the two places now know a 'faster way'. However if they all try to use that information at the same time, then there is suddenly a traffic jam. So when we have a short cut and we tell everyone to use it, then it might not be a short cut anymore.
Also, the idea of having user input involves tracking a user which may violate his privacy. When I was working with some construction crews I thought about this a lot. I realized that these guys did not want to have their lives tracked as they didn't always do what they said they did or go where they said they were. They didn't lead 9-5 lives, and no one needed to know. They got their jobs done or they didn't get paid. And yet having a GPS and transmitter in the truck to allow for an easy truck inventory for the fleet was very desirable.
If we take tracking of motion to an extreame, one would could set up tracking that would be very percise, but then we would have a flood of data. If we can track a persons finger movements, we can track their keystrokes. We can track their handwriting. Fortunately the bandwidth to do this for everyone is huge. The ideas seems perposterous now. However, to do it for a small group perhaps wouldn't be impossible.
I believe that On-Star must have a plan to do something with all of the data that they collect. But if they do they could be compromising the privacy of the car owners. Obviously this is an area where caution and vigilance are needed to assure that new tyrranies do not arrise from emerging technologies. I am not worried because if people feel they are violated, then they will disable the tracking. However, as this data is so useful for insurance accident investigations, and police criminal investigations, there might be a time when this kind of tracking is forced into acceptance. The British in London are using GPS to charge people to drive into the city.
At the point when police use GPS to blanket issuance of speeding tickets there will be public outcry and this issue then will become of major importance. It hasn't happened yet but given the huge number of police organizations it seems like just a small time before some one some where tries to do this.
The question of owner ship of tracking data comes up. When actors are strapped to sensors and their motions control an computer generated animation they are considered to be acting for the camera. Do they then own the performance?
If a person is driving his secret short cut in his car and giving this data (unknowingly perhaps) to OnStar, does OnStar then have the right to publish this and sell it to others?
I would think that they should not have the right. I would hope that law allows that a persons motions and activities are his 'performance' and that publishing them would have to meet with approval of the performer. This is a lot to think about. But clearly there are some new issues here that need to be addressed.
|
