IANAL, but from what I understand from my civics education, in the US there is no guarantee of privacy when in a public space, and the government owns the highways and owns the licensure of drivers and vehicles on those highways.
The government also owns the sidewalks, parks, waterways, the airspace, the RF airwaves, and other public land. As such, it can monitor and enforce the acceptable use of this property.
The US government also claims the right to surveillance on private land (up to the house) as defined in Open Fields ruling of 1924.
The question is, why doesn't the public know about this?
The followup question is, what public records law lets FDOT decline disclosing anything about tracking?
The author's position is:
> And the state mustn’t be shielded from releasing information about what the system is, how it tracks our data, who gets access to it, and what protections we have for that information. The system is paid for by the public, and those overseeing it are elected by the public, so there is no law, excuse, or reason for the Florida government to be hiding this information.
While you are right about 'no guarantee of privacy when in a public space', one of the points is "The laws, which are nonexistent, should be very strict about who can access this data, and how it can be used." They can define what is not acceptable use of this information.
I'd add, this is not necessarily true in the future, because we have justices on both sides of the Supreme Court concerned about surveillance and privacy (most transparently Alito, Kagan, Sotomayer), and that could be a majority in future rulings. This made the news in U.S. v. Jones.
Where I live the "roads" are private easements, which provides adequate protections from government surveillance. Private property, with reciprocal easements, is a solution.
How is it secret? they record all tags and bill you automatically... I dont even know why they asked you to buy a sunpass device (not sure if it's still required)... They probably also record your TPMS (tire pressure sensors).
The government also owns the sidewalks, parks, waterways, the airspace, the RF airwaves, and other public land. As such, it can monitor and enforce the acceptable use of this property.
The US government also claims the right to surveillance on private land (up to the house) as defined in Open Fields ruling of 1924.
https://www.agweb.com/news/business/farmland/unbounded-gover...
In addition, the freedom to take photographs of anyone at any time in public (and on public space) is allowed.
https://www.aclusocal.org/en/photographers-rights
The government does not own the Internet, and the US government handed over control in 2016.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-government-no-longer-...
Some surveillance on the Internet is legal/allowable.
https://www.privacyaffairs.com/internet-surveillance/
Anyone want to add to this list or critique?