Government Shouldn't Be Suing Navigation Innovator, Waze, It Should Emulate It

RCM ^ | 06/21/2018 | Gus Van Horn

[SeekAndFind]

Driving in DC used to be a nightmare for me until Waze replaced stand still traffic with pleasant drives through picturesque neighborhoods. Unfortunately, residents may not feel a similar delight when they see my car. They’re weary of speeders, noise, and rudeness; and they're fighting back. (I would too, if I couldn't even back out of my driveway) And so, there are rumblings about forcing companies to be "accountable", holding them liable for traffic problems, and even preventing them from reporting certain routes. Unfortunately, this is exactly what we should not be doing.

Southern California Radio recently asked their listeners, "[H]ow could Los Angeles actually hold Waze accountable? What types of regulations should be put in place?" That's no surprise: How many times have you heard someone say, "there ought to be a law?" In a country where the federal code of regulations alone takes up ten shelves of the Library of Congress, this seems to be the conventional wisdom -- even more today than in the time of widespread, privately-run public transit.

Back then, anti-trust and interstate commerce regulations forced electric companies to sell their street car lines. This destroyed the profit margin of the lines, which then had to buy electricity full price from their former parents. Labor laws increased expenses, and road subsidies in the Great Depression set up public transit for the kill. Rightly or wrongly, the automobile eventually became cheaper than public transit.

As if demanding we repeat past mistakes wasn’t enough, some want to drag navigation app makers into court. Aping a Tel Aviv suburb that sued Waze, Los Angeles Councilman Paul Krekorian goaded his city's transportation department into investigating Google and Apple's liability for "causing dangerous traffic conditions in certain neighborhoods.

[TexasGunLover]

They followed your vehicle and others with Fast Pass or whatever tracking signal your smartphone or vehicle was transmitting.

Exactly... You're being tracked, folks need to get over the illusion they have some control over it... you don't.

[Grampa Dave]

As budgets become tighter, we will probably see tickets issued via Fast Pass for exceeding the speed limits.

[Sparticus]

I’m an 80+ mph traveler and never hog the high speed lane(there is nothing worse that a moron cruising in the left lane at 5 MPH over the limit). Waze users have always been pretty accurate in helping with that.

Actually, there's nothing worse than irresponsible drivers who think the passing lane is meant to be used for driving at reckless speeds. [wink]

[Grampa Dave]

As budgets become tighter, we will probably see tickets issued via Fast Pass for exceeding the speed limits.

California and other Blue states will be the first to do that.

Our Fast Pass stays at our home unless we go where it is needed, about once every 2-3 months. If we don’t have it, we still go through the Fast Pass line and get billed.

[TexasGunLover]

I am not positive about this, but you could go into Settings /Apps/Permissions for Google Maps and turn off/on GPS as needed. Wouldn’t that work?

It depends, as long as your okay with Google and your cell company to continue to gather exactly the same data after you do that (remember google owns waze) then yes, that would change nothing. If you didn't do that, it still wouldn't change anything.

You're probably thinking, well I could turn GPS off all together. Well that sounds good, except your carrier, who provides that data to "first tier" partners and until this week "second tier" (they announced they'd no longer sell it to them), is still gathering the data as long as the phone is on and connected to the network.

So if it makes you feel better, by all means do it, but it has no impact on the device being continually tracked.

[pepsi_junkie]

Public streets are public. Don’t like me being on the one you happen to live on? Tough luck. Move to the country.

[pepsi_junkie]

A few weeks ago. my wife ignored a Waze suggestion to avoid a particular interstate, resulting in a tire ruined due to a pot hole.

One thing that Waze does, which I do not like, is select a circuitous route that seems to it to be 30 seconds faster but is more stressful and often slower. For example on my way to New Jersy from Long Island its sent me into mid-town Manhattan at 4:30 in the afternoon on a Thursday to have me cross busiest traffic area to get to a tunnel because it saw a 10 or 15 minute backup on the Belt Parkway in Long Island. I would have gladly sat in traffic for 15 or even 20 minutes to not have gone through that. Another time it sent me through the ghettos of East New York and Brownsville to shave five minutes off my ride, which basically didn't even work because of traffic lights. But it did shave 5 years off my life, so there's that. Basically when making that commute now I just ignore Waze and take my preferred route and use Waze for alerts only.

[Eddie01]

That’s another good point.

I was in DC a month ago and they have traffic speed cams all over town.

Waze alerted me to every one down to the meter.

At least 20 cam passes, not one ticket.

Beautiful.

[Eddie01]

Waze got me from Laguardia to Connecticut. Had never been to New York.

I said to the Alamo lady can you on a map how to get to Connecticut? She stared at me like I was a crazy as I was.

I literally trusted Waze with my life. It was all I had.

There are a hundred interchanges in between. In and out of the Bronx. Flawless. Got me back too.

[hanamizu]

One thing that Waze does, which I do not like, is select a circuitous route that seems to it to be 30 seconds faster but is more stressful and often slower.

---

Waze did that to me traveling through Nashville. The interstate was clogged but I knew I didn’t want to be on surface streets in a city I don’t know. You can set it up in preferences to not do that.