wp-plugin-hostgator domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114ol-scrapes domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home4/scienrds/scienceandnerds/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114Source:https:\/\/techcrunch.com\/2023\/06\/30\/police-want-robotaxi-video-footage-to-help-solve-crimes\/<\/a><\/br> Police are starting to turn to robotaxis \u2014 specifically all of that footage captured by cameras \u2014 for video evidence to help solve crimes. While it might not be a trend quite yet, evidence suggests that the robotaxi is the new proving ground for privacy advocates and law enforcement, especially as companies like Cruise and Waymo scale to new cities.<\/p>\n Self-driving cars can have more than a dozen cameras capturing 360-degree views and reams of data as they navigate city streets. And it turns out, that\u2019s attractive to government agencies looking for evidence.<\/p>\n For instance, Bloomberg<\/a> reported Thursday that it found nine search warrants that had been issued for autonomous vehicle company Waymo\u2019s footage in San Francisco and Arizona\u2019s Maricopa County. Waymo is also testing in Los Angeles. Cruise, a Waymo rival that has operations in San Francisco, Phoenix, Austin and Houston, also received a warrant, according to Bloomberg.<\/p>\n The instances all seem reasonable \u2014 police wanted help learning more about crimes ranging from murders to robberies to an attempted kidnapping.<\/p>\n \u201cAutonomous vehicles are recording their surroundings continuously and have the potential to help with investigative leads,\u201d reads a San Francisco Police department training document<\/a>, which was obtained by Vice<\/a> in 2022. \u201cInvestigations has already done this several times.\u201d<\/p>\n Matthew Guariglia, senior policy analyst at nonprofit digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), says the issue with police being able to tap data from otherwise unassuming vehicles is that there\u2019s not always transparency on how the data is collected and stored, and how the police can access it.<\/p>\n \u201cIf an autonomous vehicle rolls up to a street corner and parks for a while, how would anyone know \u2014 or not know, for that matter \u2014 if there were police standing over a Cruise operator\u2019s desk, saying,\u00a0\u2018Move a little bit closer to that corner because we want footage of a drug deal,’\u201d said Guariglia.<\/p>\n Cruise and Waymo both told TechCrunch that, relative to the number of miles they drive, police requests don\u2019t happen often. When they do, the companies say they only provide police with data when there\u2019s a warrant or a subpoena.<\/p>\n \u201cWe carefully review each request to make sure it satisfies applicable laws and has a valid legal process,\u201d a Waymo spokesperson told TechCrunch. \u201cWaymo will analyze the requested data or information to make sure it falls within the scope of the warrant. If a request is overly broad (asks for too much information), we try to narrow it, and in some cases we object to producing any information at all.\u201d<\/p>\n Both companies also say they tailor the data provided to the specific subject of the warrant. For example, if a warrant asks for information to identify another vehicle, Cruise may only provide stills from a video. If a request requires video, then Cruise might provide a short clip from a single camera.<\/p>\n Waymo says it blurs license plates and faces of people in order to protect the privacy of bystanders who may appear in the imagery requested in the warrant. A spokesperson told TechCrunch that there are exceptions to this rule. The company might, say, unblur the license plate of an offending vehicle in the case of a hit and run, but the warrant would need to provide a detailed description of the vehicle.<\/p>\n Cruise did not respond in time to confirm if it has a similar policy.<\/p>\n \u201cPrivacy is extremely important to us which is why we disclose relevant data only in response to legal processes or exigent circumstances, where we can help a person who is in imminent danger,\u201d Navideh Forghani, a Cruise spokesperson, told TechCrunch.<\/p>\n Forghani went on to say that Cruise may share information without formal processes under genuine emergency circumstances, such as amber alerts, medical emergencies or active crimes \u2014 like sexual assault, assault with a deadly weapon, robberies, active shooter events and acts of terrorism.<\/p>\n But Guariglia says it\u2019s a slippery slope. In recent years, Amazon\u2019s Ring, a doorbell and home security company, cozied up to law enforcement<\/a> around the country, giving police easy access to data from its network of individual consumer products. Guariglia says a number of companies feel compelled to build tools that allow police to access their data, even though the police aren\u2019t their customer.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have to ask ourselves constantly, what do the companies get out of this?\u201d Guariglia told TechCrunch. \u201cThat exact thing might not happen with Cruise [and Waymo], but the concern is that cities offer permits for these companies to operate. What happens if cities start to look more favorably on companies that have cozy relationships with police departments?\u201d<\/p>\n For those who say it doesn\u2019t matter if police have access to footage because they aren\u2019t doing anything wrong, Guariglia says, \u201cyou have no idea what you\u2019re doing wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cPeople in a lot of states where it was legal to get an abortion a few months ago suddenly have to live in fear that any day now, these states could retroactively prosecute people,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd then you start to wonder about all those months where you traveled to your doctor or mental health specialist, how much data had been collected and what can law enforcement learn about me when I didn\u2019t think I had anything to hide?\u201d<\/p>\n Self-driving cars not only operate in cities. Autonomous trucks are also being tested on highways in hopes of eventually launching commercial operations with a safety driver behind the wheel. In the U.S., where there are now 14 states that have completely banned abortion<\/a>, and Idaho has restricted travel out of state<\/a> for abortions, there is a real fear that local law enforcement could attempt to use AV footage to prosecute people who seek reproductive freedom.<\/p>\n Abuse of power is a main concern, and one with precedent.<\/p>\n
\nPolice want robotaxi video footage to help solve crimes<\/br>
\n2023-06-30 21:39:12<\/br><\/p>\nI\u2019m not doing anything wrong, who cares if the police have data?<\/h2>\n