AI speed cameras have prompted anger from privacy campaign groups as the technology purports the ability to see inside cars to catch offenders.
The technology, which had been previously trialled in a handful of locations, has proved effective enough to warrant heavy use nationwide. This decision has earned the ire of privacy campaigners, many of whom feel that the act of using technology to ‘spy’ inside people’s vehicles is highly immoral and an invasion of personal freedom and the right to privacy.
Privacy - Invaded?
Concerns about privacy aside, there are definitely big calls for these new cameras to be introduced. Research recently conducted by the department of transport suggests that there are about 400,000 British drivers who are still committing crimes while they drive by using handheld devices illegally behind the wheel.
Ultimately, it is the way in which these new methods of being introduced which have had so many people come upset about the changes. In essence, there are two cameras working together in harmony in order to take two separate photos of the inside of a car. The first photo is at a shallow angle for the purpose of identifying whether or not there is a phone being used, and then the second photo takes a more steep approach, allowing the camera to see the person's lap to check if they have the phone but are simply hiding it.
Upset Campaigners
At the end of the day, the bottom line is simply that privacy campaigners don’t particularly like this idea. They are describing the idea of cameras working in this fashion as both creepy and intrusive. They also feel that the new rules basically treat everybody as being a possible suspect in a crime, which is simply unfair.
The team behind the cameras have argued that the process works through artificial intelligence which identifies the images that are suspect and then flags them for the police to take a look at and send out official letters and charges to members of the public.
Not Good Enough?
The police do maintain that there are a few measures in place for the sake of ensuring that the security and safety of people who are driving is protected regardless of whether or not they have the photo taken. The primary argument is that the photos have key identifying features like the make and model of the vehicle, as well as license plates removed from any images which are not treated as suspicious. It’s only if criminal activity can be proved that the details surrounding the vehicle are made accessible.
Jake Hurfurt is the Head of Research and Investigations at Big Brother Watch and had this to offer as a counterargument:
“Unproven AI-powered video analytics should not be used to monitor and potentially criminalise drivers.
This kind of intrusive and creepy surveillance which treats every passer-by as a potential suspect is excessive and normalising it poses a threat to everyone's privacy.
People should be free to go about their lives without being analysed by a faceless AI system.”