Arun, that article raises a few very interesting issues on the right to privacy versus the need for public safety.
If it is true that a handset solution is not totally practicable, either for financial or regulatory reasons, then the questions of when position location should be made available becomes paramount. Obviously, there is no privacy need in a 911 emergency. Otherwise, there probably is a presumption of privacy, absent probable cause for a search warrant. Further, it seems somewhat distasteful for a person's movements to be marketed by, say, the cellular phone companies.
I would expect legislation on this subject to prevent sale of this information by cellular providers. I would expect judges to issue warrants on probable cause in criminal investigations. I would expect some kind of scrambling, if technically feasible, to thwart third parties from zooming in on their targets. Finally, I would expect open transmissions in 911 situations.
I have another stock holding, in the biometric field (the use of human characteristics to self-identify or identify remotely to another party), in which this privacy issue is also being raised. We are entering into a brave new world, it seems, but we're going to have to do it carefully.
Good to see you posting again. |
