this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
19 points (100.0% liked)

Seattle

1802 readers
30 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] specialseaweed@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I worked for the city government in Houston, TX for a bunch of years. I shared an automation lab with the traffic division (just a really big room with public works gear on one side and traffic gear on the other). We would test programming changes on hardware in there before field deployment. I got to know them pretty well and got to mess with their stuff. It was interesting because of how differently they approached the question of automation than I did. Whereas my programs and gear were more focused on local control with manual override for local operators, their gear was hyperfocused on timing across controllers in a region, backup controller switching, and file verification. The process they had to go thru to change timing was exhausting and I'd read stories in media about citizens being pissed about traffic lights not being right while their engineers had been going thru the struggle to validate timings at that exact location for weeks and months. They were an unloved bunch but that's what you gotta do when a single timing or programming error kills people.

Anyway.

Houston decided to try to save its taxpayers money by doing a public/private with a red light camera company. They'd share the revenue generated and they started with (I think it was 6?) intersections that were the worst for red light running results in serious injury and property damage. One was near my house and I was really happy about it because if you know Houston, 610 south loop feeder at Stella Link is terrifying.

The citizen response was ferocious. People (including city workers and cops) were just straight up spouting bullshit about the cameras and the traffic department, the most common being that traffic lowered the time of the yellow in order to trap people into more tickets because the real purpose of the cameras was revenue generation. Even my close family were convinced traffic fucked with the yellows.

So I roll over to their side of the lab to ask traffic and you could tell they were super pissed off about it. They brought out all programming change documentation to that signal going back a decade. Maintenance records for the gear. SCADA communication records. Everything. They had already put together their data to defend themselves and it was iron clad. They even dug out the bluetooth data showing the average speed had gone down approaching the red light proving that driver habits were responding to the camera, resulting in fewer accidents with less lethality when it did happen. The Stella Link "short yellow" became the most complained about light in the greater Houston metro. They told me they got more complaints on that yellow in a week than they had gotten on that light for any reason in any 12 month period.

After a big political fight, the cameras were turned off. In the seven day period after they were turned off, no complaints against the Stella Link yellow were made. It just magically stopped being a problem. And my father in law told me that I had been lied to by traffic and that no matter what I said or saw, he knows they changed the timing.

anyways, yes to red light cameras

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They even dug out the bluetooth data showing the average speed had gone down approaching the red light proving that driver habits were responding to the camera

How does this work exactly? Tracking people's bluetooth devices as they pass the intersection?

[–] chaospatterns@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

I didn't know about intersections, but knew that some retail stores and businesses actually do this. Devices around the stores will listen for Bluetooth transmissions or even WiFi signals from phones to see where people are congregating, how long they're in the store, and all kinds of things. It's why Android and Apple changed to use random addresses for phones.

You and your devices give off a lot of unexpected signals that can be monitored and tracked. Some things could be good like monitoring dwell time at a business or even queueing time at Disneyland, others could be used for marketing at a company. Just something to consider the next time you use WiFi at a business.

[–] specialseaweed@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not the intersection itself exactly, but city gear along the way. Bluetooth was used for comms for the first field wireless meter reads because all field communication was shoddy back then. I know it sounds stupid now but it was amazing vs the old way of each meter having to be actually physically read. There were employees whose whole job was to drive a city truck around a specific route to collect data, which was seen as a huge productivity upgrade from getting out at each place and looking at the meter. As much gear as possible was deployed with bluetooth connectivity so they could do drive by "remote" reads. Houston standardized on it for awhile before more modern techniques for reads came out. Water meters, sensors for public works water main, well levels for drains under overpasses, stuff like that all over the city. City gear is absolutely everywhere, we're all just conditioned to ignore it. You couldn't write to the device from the field, but if you polled it it would answer with a reading for whatever it was measuring.

At some point they realized some people left their bluetooth on on their phones (which wasn't the case when the initial deployment happened, bluetooth was seen by most as a battery sucking crap technology) and by comparing the bluetooth ping logs at two points they could approximate driving speeds to a decently accurate degree. You couldn't use the data to pinpoint a specific user really and you couldn't pinpoint speed exactly so it was no use to law enforcement, but it was fabulous data to model traffic on.

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At some point they realized some people left their bluetooth on on their phones (which wasn’t the case when the initial deployment happened, bluetooth was seen by most as a battery sucking crap technology) and by comparing the bluetooth ping logs at two points they could approximate driving speeds to a decently accurate degree. You couldn’t use the data to pinpoint a specific user really and you couldn’t pinpoint speed exactly so it was no use to law enforcement, but it was fabulous data to model traffic on.

This is exactly why I turn my bluetooth off of my phone. I know grocery stores use this too for tracking where people shop within the store.

[–] specialseaweed@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Absolutely. There is a granularity of data and ability to process it today that did not exist when Houston was using it, but we were aware then of the serious questions of privacy regarding the ethics of reading devices without permission that all of us were grappling with. The conclusion was that it was ethical to use because tools didn't exist to de-anonymize that data even if someone wanted to. There was no way to match a bluetooth MAC address to anything.

That was a different time though. Privacy got nuked from orbit.

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We live in the dumbest timeline

[–] nairui@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Is this bad? I thought cameras would help reduce people running red lights etc

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] kinther@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I hadn't even thought of that aspect of this. Fuck

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Traffic cameras are revenue generators for police departments. Better road infrastructure is the way to make the roads safer. Traffic calming makes cars drive safer without requiring enforcement.

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

A penny to the PD is a penny too much. Speed bumps are better.

[–] blakemiller@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Hello! The consequence for going too fast over a speed bump is you get jostled around a bit and you decide how much of that you can tolerate. The consequence of running a red light can either be nothing or a collision. Red light cameras add an incentive for you to avoid a potential collision. We can have speed bumps and cameras :)

Would you feel better if 100% of the revenue collected from red light infractions went back to better road infrastructure?

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There are better forms of traffic calming than speed bumps. Building an overly wide and smooth high speed road and then putting a speed bump in the middle of it is the kind of stupidity that typifies american road infrastructure. Rough, narrow, and curved mixed use streets causes traffic to drive slowly. Traffic cameras and school zones only exist because american roads are intentionally designed to be dangerous.

Money raised from road fines and tolls should go to public transport, like busses, and light rail.

[–] blakemiller@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

Oh you won’t find much disagreement from me there, and you clearly care deeply. What we have in our infrastructure is hard to change and so despite better alternatives, we have to look at what options are available and cost effective. For that reason, red light cameras and speed bumps are appropriate solutions in an Americanized roadway until we figure out to fund and deploy the big boys you really want. After all, Americans understand punishment way better than they do public transport!

[–] lessthanluigi 1 points 1 day ago

Nah, they don't really help with that much actually. People don't usually really run reds onpurpose, and people who usually run reds are not noticing that the light is red for one reason or another. And most people are just trying to strech a yellow light most of the time, which is safer than not in a lot of cases.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

You must like driving 25 MPH?

The city is turning into a giant residential neighborhood. Speed bumps everywhere, no turn on red signs, and now speed trap cameras. They really hate cars.

[–] chaospatterns@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

The city residents are also seemingly forgetting about safety. In the past six months there's been a car accident on the intersection right by my building about every month from somebody running a red light and colliding.

Cameras have their privacy considerations but I'm getting concerned about my safety as a pedestrian.

[–] VivaAmerica@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

But tbf a large chunk of Seattle is residential

[–] LettucePrey@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

Speed bumps everywhere, no turn on red signs, and now speed trap cameras.

I'm in support of speed bumps and no turn on red signal. As a pedestrian, cars (and bikes!) are dangerous.

Cameras suck though. Fuck cameras.