Big Brother Wants Black Boxes In Your Car

The Blue said:
Yeah, because it is nothing like that little box you keep glued to your ear 6 hours a day :rolleyes:. Anyway I would be for it if they could not access it through a wireless connection. Only use it maybe when they are like selling the car (for diagnosis, any wrecks and the sort) that is not far from what they have now. It could also be just as useful in accidents, as long as the data was considered your own. Maybe a warrant or permission is needed to access it legally. That data should be considered private.
Click to expand...

Apple is a whole different deal. I'm just as worried about being tagged as the next guy, but I'm not stupid enough to think that the government is going to force it's citizens to use a black box that is going to tell them anything more than basic information, of which we are informed. There is always a chance for political corruption to change the picture on down the road, but that is going to be the reality of the future no matter which way we turn. We cannot live in fear of our government and let it drive us into imprudence.
 
Spidey329 said:
They have that at Progressive, it's called "Snapshot" and I use it on my car (uses a celltower uplink). It's a device that plugs into the computer port and relays information. I get a significant discount because I'm listed as good driver because of it ;)
Click to expand...

till your, i mean it's spidey sense starts tingling and you get arse raped with fees because of it :p
 
If they started using this for speeding tickets I think there would be so many that there would be a change in the speeding laws. Or I could be wrong and everybody would just learn to live without speeding.
 
The problem with people calling this "big brother" and stuff like that and predicting the end of civilization as we know it is that when you make doomsday prophicies like this you assume there won't be any changes and that people won't understand what is going on. It can happen if we are not careful. I just don't know how.
 
A lot of cars already have capabilities similar to this, and have for years.

For instance, I have a 07 Civic Si. The car only comes in manual transmission, and a large part of the demographic that purchases this specific model of car are first time manual transmission drivers.

Now, it is quite often that these novice stick drivers often mis-shit their car, and end up blowing the clutch, or damaging some part of their transmission. So what do they do? They take it to a Honda dealership in hopes of having it fixed under warranty.

The thing is, when a mis-shift or over rev >8500rpm occurs, the ECM automatically records it. So when the techs at the dealership plug it into their computer, they see the over-rev/mis-shift, and promptly tell the customer it's their fault, and it is not covered by the warranty...

The scenario is not exactly the same, but I am sure you can see how it correlates...
 
Makes me think that I don't want sell my cars, maybe they will actually appreciate some in value.
 
Vlad335 said:
Awhile back the Obama Dept. of Transportation wanted to tax drivers per mile. It appears this is the first step in that direction.
Click to expand...

False.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/05/is-obama-going-to-tax-drivers/

The idea and study was created by bi-partisan Congress in 2006. It was just a study and the White House was just made aware of it. Nobody's talking about implementing it despite knowing that it would increase revenue compared to fuel tax this per-mile tax will replace.
 
Hamish Campbell said:
What are you even saying here? You don't have the freedom to speed now. You wouldn't be losing anything in that scenario.
Click to expand...

No, but I am supposed to have the right to due process, which includes the right to face my accusser. How then do I face a black box?! The Constitution is supposed to protect from harrassment from the Police and the Government, keeping them from micromanageing our lives. The Founding Fathers fought the Revolution because the Brits would not allow them a voice. This does not allow you a voice!!!

If you can't see a problem with the Government using technology such as this to control the citizens, to gather money thru fines, then you are probably already too brainwashed to understand.
 
Uh, cars already have this capability ever since OBD2.... When you get into an accident, and it sets off the impact sensors or airbag system, it takes a snapshot on the PCM/ECM of the vehicle's sensor data... sooo say you were at wide open throttle and the brakes were not applied, they would see this...
 
Another thing to think about ... if any car company was to send your driving data to any Law Enforcement Agency to monitor/record your speed they would either ask the Governments of the country to pay up for each car that has it installed or they would expect a percentage of every fine issued. Otherwise, the gov't can go fuck itself and buy speed radars.
 
DigitalisAkujin said:
Blackbox = No more speeding + increased traffic due to that.
Click to expand...

Actually it's pretty well documented that those who speed are the reasons why there is traffic issues in the first place.

Ever see that guy who needs to get over in then next lane because it's a little bit faster than his? whoops everyone behind him needed to break a little, chain reaction... then that lane isn't going as fast change again... whoops another lane gets congested. Even if there is not much in the way of traffic, a faster driver tends to brake much harder as a result, where as someone obeying the limit can gradually slow down, hard brakers tend to cause traffic to back up more so (mostly because there tends to be more than one who is driving fast).
 
mannyman said:
I would be for this, I was t boned in the drivers door due to a woman passing in the intersection. She told the cops i pulled out in front of her, i got ticketed. Much more to this story but i dont feel like typing it.
Click to expand...

Fine, then make it so YOU can turn it on while the rest of us who don't want it can turn it off...
 
sfsuphysics said:
Actually it's pretty well documented that those who speed are the reasons why there is traffic issues in the first place.

Ever see that guy who needs to get over in then next lane because it's a little bit faster than his? whoops everyone behind him needed to break a little, chain reaction... then that lane isn't going as fast change again... whoops another lane gets congested. Even if there is not much in the way of traffic, a faster driver tends to brake much harder as a result, where as someone obeying the limit can gradually slow down, hard brakers tend to cause traffic to back up more so (mostly because there tends to be more than one who is driving fast).
Click to expand...

Completely wrong. The majority of studies show that when the speed limit is raised, traffic thins out and real commercial gains are made to the local area. This just happened in Ohio recently and there was a story about it.
 
Just looked it up and specifically it was raised on the Ohio turnpike. The average speed ticked up, accidents decreased significantly, and the area was more profitable as a result.
 
• Overall on the turnpike, the average speedometer reading for passenger cars ticked up to 76 mph with the higher limit, according to the recent survey. (Cars clocked in at 74 mph during a November survey before the speed limit change.) Commercial trucks on the toll road cruised at 68 mph compared to 64 mph in the fall.
• The extra dash of speed hasn't led to more crashes. In fact, numbers decreased slightly in April from the previous year. Troopers investigated 141 crashes compared to 145 in April 2010.
The turnpike has seen one fatal crash so far in 2011, equal to the number at the same point last year.
• Speed seems to work for business.
The number of trucks using the turnpike increased with the speed limit in April, rising slightly while total traffic decreased. (Officials attribute the overall drop to higher fuel prices.) The Turnpike Commission had hoped that the change to 70 mph would lure more trucks onto the toll road, pulling them off of smaller parallel routes.
Click to expand...

See above
 
Anyone else reminded of that Stallone movie, Judge Dredd? Some of the scenarios presented here are definitely getting my "what-if" gears turning.

IIRC, Dredd was charged with murder, and the only real evidence against him was in the form of an electronic recording device that was considered "irrefutable proof." I think it was their guns that had fingerprint ID systems, and the bullets were encoded with the user's DNA or something...?

It certainly wasn't the best film:

In America, the film won several "worst film of the year" awards.
Click to expand...

Anyhoo, that's the only type of scenario (albeit pure fiction) I can come up with where the results would be drastically negative. But then again, that's why we have something called "due process" in the American justice system: to shake out the bugs in such types of law and enforcement. It's not perfect by any means, but it's better than the majority of others out there, IMO/E. ;)

I can still appreciate some drivers' anxiety about having something in the vehicle that's able to monitor their every move. I don't like it when LEOs follow me around while I'm driving, but I've learned that just chilling out and driving normally gets better results than acting like a teenager taking his first driving test.

My only real objection thus far is the sooper-dooper encryption for those electronic records. If I'm the owner of a vehicle, I should have the right to look at data I've created with it. The automaker can go F itself. And yes, this is where we cross the line from "data logging" to "spying," in my opinion. Someone mentioned it earlier, but I'll bet the ACLU will not let this rest.
 
Big John said:
I wonder how long it will be until they program it to "Auto Squeal" on you for speeding?! Of coarse, the Liberal judges will allow it for "public safety".

Just exactly what freedoms do we have left?
Click to expand...

All newer cars have GPS tracking in case of theft, I know my car has it. What is to stop them abusing GPS and tracking your speed? Who even knows how these GPS devices are operated? Are they only monitored when you report your car stolen or what?

Those are more of a concern than a black box because the data in a black box is recorded locally in your car only and not hooked up to a satellite like GPS is. With this GPS data they could track our location and speed easily.
 
ryko said:
wow, that is ridiculous...f*ck you honda
Click to expand...

Haha.

"So I was tossing this brick around, y'know, for kicks, and it accidentally shattered my front windshield. I'd like to have it fixed under warranty please! Toodles."

Is basically what those owners are asking.
 
The recording of ride parameters is not really something that could compromise privacy. It's better to really know what happend with vehicle before crash and so on.
 
computerpro3 said:
Completely wrong. The majority of studies show that when the speed limit is raised, traffic thins out and real commercial gains are made to the local area. This just happened in Ohio recently and there was a story about it.
Click to expand...
Actually complete right. I didn't say going very fast causes traffic slowdowns, I said speeding causes traffic slowdowns. Meaning people who exceed the speed limit. Raise the limit, as a result less "speeders". Having a smaller variation between those who speed and those who don't means less traffic issues, simply because there is a limit to how fast people are willing to go, the traffic limit was raised what? 5mph? 10mph? and average speeds only increased 2mph?

Regardless of what you may think there are still quite a few people who obey traffic speed laws. If everyone went the speed limit however, you'll never have cars that catch up to one another, as a result traffic never piles up, which is where hitting the brakes quickly causes a backups. Sure you'll get areas where cars merge or leave the freeway, but with a smaller density of cars, those parts seamlessly integrate into traffic.
 
Cars newer than 10 or 15 years old already have them. You can disable ABS to turn them off though...
 
Gnasher said:
All newer cars have GPS tracking in case of theft, I know my car has it. What is to stop them abusing GPS and tracking your speed? Who even knows how these GPS devices are operated? Are they only monitored when you report your car stolen or what?

Those are more of a concern than a black box because the data in a black box is recorded locally in your car only and not hooked up to a satellite like GPS is. With this GPS data they could track our location and speed easily.
Click to expand...

Most newer cars DO NOT have GPS tracking, it's an add on and a small percentage of cars have it instaleld on initial sale.

Besides that, current black box tracking has nothing to do with position, but everything to do with speed, accelleration (all axis's), ABS activation, gear setting, wheel/pedal position etc... And they only have this for liability, in case the maker is at fault, they can create a recall or defend themselves.

Typically, it takes a court order for car makers to release the data, but you know how sneaky big brother is, this new proposal is probably a rouse to cover what they have already done illegally, to make it legal somehow.
 
Azhar said:
False.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/05/is-obama-going-to-tax-drivers/

The idea and study was created by bi-partisan Congress in 2006. It was just a study and the White House was just made aware of it. Nobody's talking about implementing it despite knowing that it would increase revenue compared to fuel tax this per-mile tax will replace.
Click to expand...

Factcheck.org... Lol.

This didn't start and stop in 2006 and the White House was not "just made aware of it."

Sure nobodies talking about implementing this, except maybe Ray LaHood, who has the obscure title of Transportation Secretary. His comments created a firestorm that the administration had to immediately walk back. Nice words by Mr. Gibbs but I don't believe everything the government tells me but instead look at their actions.

Mr. LaHood was not let go and was not even chastised for obviously going rogue.

First, they did not cut off funding in anyway to explore or implement this idea. On the contrary, the big road block to implementation would be the hardware install in everyone's cars to actually obtain the data but wait! What? Now the government wants to look out for our "safety" and install black boxes. Despite the horrific cost and complications of such an undertaking they are only doing this because they care about us.

Lastly, do you really think this would replace the taxes the government takes at the pump?
 
What about if you modify your car and take it to the strip. I drag race my daily driver about 2-3 times a year at the local Drag Strip. I could only imagine going 100+ in the quarter mile only to get a ticket the next day. WTF!?!?!
 
GhosT15 said:
/flame suit on

Something like this would have saved me a hit against my insurance and costing me my deductable. I was the second car stopped at a stop sign, the car infront went to turn (there turn) as a car on the far side didn't stop and started to turn. The car infront of me freaked out, and proceeded to floor it in reverse, right into my car. Now it looks like I rear-ended the SUV, and thats exactly what she told the cops. As the cop couldn't prove my story (yeah for no witnesses sticking around) I get hit with the fine.

That black-box could have proved I was at 0mph and breaks depressed when I was hit. As long as its only used during accidents it might not be that bad.
Click to expand...

QFT.

Everybody spouting that their freedoms or whatnot are at stake, I suggest you re-evaluate your viewpoint on this. If something like this could potentially save lives, or even save people the hassle of being in situations like GhosT15 was in here, then it is worth it 100% and I would be willing to accept it. Hell, I could think of a few situations where this would have helped several people that I know.

Not only that, but you're not free to break the law in the first place, how would this change anything other than to make sure that people actually follow the rules (oh god forbid, not the rules!)?
 
My new pickup stickered at $52,000 due partially to crap like this. If they want, they can pay for it and then pay me a monthly fee for doing their data collection for them
 
Vlad335 said:
Factcheck.org... Lol.

This didn't start and stop in 2006 and the White House was not "just made aware of it."

Sure nobodies talking about implementing this, except maybe Ray LaHood, who has the obscure title of Transportation Secretary. His comments created a firestorm that the administration had to immediately walk back. Nice words by Mr. Gibbs but I don't believe everything the government tells me but instead look at their actions.

Mr. LaHood was not let go and was not even chastised for obviously going rogue.

First, they did not cut off funding in anyway to explore or implement this idea. On the contrary, the big road block to implementation would be the hardware install in everyone's cars to actually obtain the data but wait! What? Now the government wants to look out for our "safety" and install black boxes. Despite the horrific cost and complications of such an undertaking they are only doing this because they care about us.

Lastly, do you really think this would replace the taxes the government takes at the pump?
Click to expand...

Got a source? I did. I'd rather believe what I read from several sources and actual documents than the ravings of a disgruntled citizen, especially when they end it with a conspiracy theory.
 
Azhar said:
Got a source? I did. I'd rather believe what I read from several sources and actual documents than the ravings of a disgruntled citizen, especially when they end it with a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but factcheck.org isn't a source. Common....
 
LOL old news for me because we have them at my work already along with a digital video camera that if I get in a accident it will records front, both sides, rear and of course myself driving.. Its all uploaded to a place in San Diego, CA they review the recordings there. Sometimes the camera goes off because I hit a bump in the road so they review it and anything that they do not like that I did. Maybe not driving with both hands eating something using the cell they will send it via email to my boss to review..
I also here they are working on sensors that will go in your car and all over the roads, highways etc it will tell if your speeding, driving bad and you will get charge a fee at the end of the year for your bad driving..
 
computerpro3 said:
I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but factcheck.org isn't a source. Common....
Click to expand...

Like Wikipedia, in itself it's not a source, but the article contains links to them. There were several in there.
 
Emission said:
QFT.

Everybody spouting that their freedoms or whatnot are at stake, I suggest you re-evaluate your viewpoint on this. If something like this could potentially save lives, or even save people the hassle of being in situations like GhosT15 was in here, then it is worth it 100% and I would be willing to accept it. Hell, I could think of a few situations where this would have helped several people that I know.

Not only that, but you're not free to break the law in the first place, how would this change anything other than to make sure that people actually follow the rules (oh god forbid, not the rules!)?
Click to expand...

Ghost's position is that the officer was probably a horndog and did a poor job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top