noPhoto: Traffic Camera Countermeasures

When a new technology comes along that causes enough grumbling from a large enough group of people, it is usually not very long before a technological countermeasure appears. When they started installing the intersection traffic cameras a few years back, there was an outcry from some groups stating they were a violation of privacy. Whether it was a real issue of privacy to them, or just the aggravation over now getting caught for not coming to full stop or actually running through an intersection altogether, it nevertheless became a point of discussion for many people. Well, it seems there is now at least one new product in production that seeks to use technology against technology, with a solution which seems to walk the thin line between legal and illegal. The noPhoto license plate frame operates by using its own xeon flash technology to counter the camera's photo.

The idea is quite simple, and according to the official noLimits web site this is how it works:

1. The traffic camera fires its flash to illuminate your car for a picture.
2. The noPhoto detects the flash, analyzes it, and sends the proper firing sequence to its own xeon flashes.
3. The noPhoto precisely times and fires the flash at the exact moment needed to overexpose the traffic camera.
4. Since the traffic camera is not expecting the additional light from the noPhoto, all of its automated settings are incorrect and the image is completely overexposed.  Your license plate cannot be seen and you will not get a ticket in the mail.

So, by causing a bright xeon strobe counter flash, the image that is actually received by the traffic camera turns out to be a bright, overexposed and unreadable image. The Blaze also had a recent article on this technology, and there was one particular commenter that caught my eye. The comment was on 10/29 from a retired deputy using the screen name Deathrattle, who voiced this concern as well as commenting about the legality:

Great idea in the tech of this plate frame. The only thing I can see that may be a violation is how bright the light is when seen by an officer. As a retired Deputy I used improper rear lights as a reason to stop vehicles many, many times. If this is a quick flash that would not impair another driver’s vision it might fly. Until that is the state legislator catches up with it.

The justification for the use of these cameras at intersections is usually that they help reduce accidents. However, after many studies by the National Motorist Association in the states where these cameras are used seem to show that in general, these traffic cameras do not decrease the amount of accidents, but that in fact in many cases they have caused a rise in some forms of accidents. One study in Los Angeles stated that they “found that several ticket camera intersections in Los Angeles had as many as three times the number of accidents,” while similar studies in the districts in Virginia with cameras found “when these results are aggregated across all six jurisdictions, the cameras are associated with a net increase in comprehensive crash costs.” A rise in rear-end accidents was noticeable, and the Los Angeles article relates a story of one driver, who states, “Because I had [cameras] in the back of my mind - I knew I had to stop. And it’s so expensive to get a ticket I knew I had to stop. Well [the two cars that rear ended me] had no inclination to stop.”

It seems the driver had the time and room to stop safely, so can this accident really be blamed on the cameras? He stated “Yes, definitely.” However, he was stopping as he legally should, and he shouldn’t have been concerned about the camera or getting caught. The two drivers behind him sought to break the law and caused the accident. The camera couldn't change that out of the three drivers involved, only one of them had a right response to traffic light laws and safety.

So, while the lights can be a frustration, maybe that is only because we have become so unruly and loose when it comes to safety and obedience to the laws. Maybe we need some reprogramming to be more cautious and consider safety first, even if that initially comes from our fear of getting caught. I know for me, when it comes to intersections where I know there are cameras, I am more aware, and hopefully that makes me more aware and cautious at all intersections in general. To me, this situation is similar to the days when everyone bought radar detectors in order to not get caught by the police radar. Why would a safe, law-abiding driver need such a product? It was only for those who wanted to push things beyond the confines of the law, and this noPhoto technology seems to be similar.

It is because there were enough Americans voicing their concern over the issue that this type of new technology can find its place on the production line. When it comes to legality, noPhoto technology is said to be acceptable because there is no law against how bright your plate is. If this technology does take off, you can bet there will be new laws put in place the future. Until then, we must consider exactly what the real motivation is behind this type of technology. Will it just open the doors for more abuse and pushing the limits of safety at intersections? Since cameras go off for those breaking the rules, is this noPhoto technology mainly for those wishing to continue breaking the rules? How does it benefit the law-abiding citizen? What are your thoughts on this type of countermeasure?

Image courtesy of noPhoto.com