Most of us are already sharing our location with private corporations almost every day. Could we use that data for good — or do we need to fight back against rider surveillance?
Imagine a world where your local planning department leaders know exactly how many people are driving, walking, biking and taking transit on every single street in your city, at all times. They know the moment when a car crash happens. They know how many seats are occupied on every train or bus — and know the moment when those modes are so full that riders get turned away. They know how many people are walking down a busy street without a sidewalk. They know the routes of every commute — whether to the downtown core or to some new job center that just sprang up, and, from that information, could follow up and determine how many of those drivers would be perfectly happy to take a bus if they just had a convenient stop.
Sounds great — but wait, there’s more: The data is anonymous, of course, but a supercomputer and a census map overlay would make it pretty easy to put a name to nearly every faceless data point on the map. So is all this data a nightmare or an incredible opportunity to start using all that data to build a transportation system that really works?
Is Big Brother watching?
It’s a question that’s at the heart of a new debate about the role of big data in transportation — and if two opposing groups succeed, it will soon be on the lips of everyone who cares about the future of our streets.
The first is Citizens Against Rider Surveillance, a diverse coalition which was borne out of an ongoing dispute between Uber and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation. The app-based taxi giant and the city agency are currently embroiled in a lawsuit, with Uber alleging that the DOT overstepped its bounds when it began requiring micromobility companies, like Uber’s own Jump, to supply real-time trip data directly to the city in 2018.
is the ‘continue reading’ link correct? [Fixed. LBM]