Is big brother watching you?

Topic: Is big brother watching you? (Read 2185 times) previous topic - next topic

Is big brother watching you?

August 23, 2006, 01:25:01 PM

http://autos.aol.com/article/general/v2/_a/whos-watching/20060816150109990001

Big Brother will be watching you for sure by 2008 -- the year a proposed requirement that Event Data Recorders (EDRs) become mandatory standard equipment in all new cars and trucks will become law unless public outrage puts the kibosh on it somehow.

EDRs are "black boxes" -- just like airplanes have. They can record a wide variety of things -- including how fast you drive and whether you "buckle-up for safety." The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) wants EDRs to be installed in every new vehicle beginning with model year 2008 -- on the theory that the information will help crash investigators more accurately determine the hows and whys of accidents.

But EDRs could -- and likely will be -- used for other purposes as well.

Tied into GPS navigation computers, EDRs could give interested parties the ability to take automated ticketing to the next level. Since the data recorders can continuously monitor most of the operating parameters of a vehicle as it travels -- and the GPS unit can precisely locate the vehicle in "real time," wherever it happens to be at any given moment -- any and all incidents of "speeding" could be immediately detected and a piece of paying paper issued to the offender faster than he could tap the brake. That's even if he knew he was in the crosshairs, which of course he wouldn't. Probably they'll just erect an electronic debiting system of some sort that ties directly into your checking account -- since the paperwork could not keep up with the massive uptick in fines that would be generated.

What Do You Think?
If you think this is just a dark-minded paranoiac vision, think again. Rental car companies have already deployed a very similar system of onboard electronic monitoring to identify customers who dare to drive faster than the posted limit -- and automatically tap them with a "surcharge" for their scofflaw ways. While this inventive form of "revenue enhancement" was challenged and subsequently batted down by the courts, the technology continues to be honed -- and quietly put into service.

Already, 15-20 percent of all the cars and trucks in service have EDRs; most of these are General Motors vehicles. GM has been installing "black boxes" in its new cars and trucks since about 1996 as part of the Supplemental Restraint (air bag) system. Within a few years, as many as 90 percent of all new motor vehicles will be equipped with EDRs, according to government estimates -- whether the requirement NHTSA is pushing actually becomes law or not.

The automakers are just as eager to keep tabs on us as the government -- in part to keep the shyster lawyers who have been so successfully digging into their deep pockets at bay. EDRs would provide irrefutable evidence of high-speed driving, for example -- or make it impossible for a person injured in a crash to deny he wasn't wearing a seat belt.

Insurance companies will launch "safety" campaigns urging that "we use available technology" to identify "unsafe" drivers -- and who will be able to argue against that? Everyone knows that speeding is against the law -- and if you aren't breaking the law, what have you got to worry about?

It's all for our own good.

But if you get edgy thinking about the government -- and our friends in corporate America -- being able to monitor where we go and how we go whenever they feel like checking in on us, take the time to write a "Thanks, but no thanks" letter to NHTSA at http://dms.dot.gov/

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #1 – August 23, 2006, 04:36:35 PM

They did not even mention the cost added to vehicle purchase which comes out of the comsumer's pocket.

Looks like another reason to kep the old car goin'

I wonder if they can be disabled.

I would think many civil liberty lawsuits would be filed before ticketing based on this would become a reality.

Certainly accident investigation would be improved which would be the only benefit.

where I live everyone is over the speed limit by a bit in most cases...what would happen everyone racks up soooooooo many points they can no longer drive LOL

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #2 – August 23, 2006, 04:37:04 PM

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #3 – August 23, 2006, 05:14:20 PM

Poop... i hate people trying to work there way into my life, expecialy the government...

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #4 – August 23, 2006, 05:31:16 PM

Interesting. I heard a story that the government would also tax people based on how much they drive. All that info would be gathered through one of these things I suppose.

Yeah, keep the old car. That is until they figure out a way to force everyone into new cars.

As far as disabling it. If they are able to be watchful of your every move in real time, they will know it was disabled. I'm sure you would be sent a nice little fine.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #5 – August 23, 2006, 05:57:38 PM

Quote from: 5.0willgo

Interesting. I heard a story that the government would also tax people based on how much they drive.

I'm pretty sure they already do that with the tax they lay on top of gasoline.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #6 – August 23, 2006, 09:01:02 PM

yep. that is why that tax gasoline, and have tolls..
to tax how much you drive and use the roads.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #7 – August 23, 2006, 09:20:58 PM

Every time I read about this (and it is a very old issue) I laugh at the paranoia it brings about. As the above article states, this type of system has been in use for a decade in GM (and other) vehicles. Any vehicle with GPS and airbags has the capability. And personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with it, as long as it is used to make safer cars (why the NHTSA and IIHS are interested) and prevent insurance fraud and frivolous lawsuits (why the automakers are interested). Of course I'd be 100% against using such a system to send out speeding tickets, but I have nothing against charging somebody with dangerous driving after an accident if the "black box" in their car indicates they were driving dangerously. I certainly have nothing against using that info to prevent the driver from suing the manufacturer (or another driver) by proving they were driving badly or not buckled up.

I suppose my opinion comes from having nothing to hide. I also am in favour of video surveillance in public places if doing so can reduce crime. I have nothing to hide so I don't care if somebody is watching me. If I'm driving and I'm speeding (by a wide margin) I have nothing against getting a speeding ticket, although I firmly believe speed limits are set artificially low to generate revenue. I'm also against red light and speed cameras because they are revenue generators, not safety promoters.

I guess it boils down to this: My right to live outweighs your right to live in privacy. If you don't respect the laws (such as drunk or dangerous driving) why should the laws respect you? And if you're too stupid to wear your belt, why should an insurance company or manufacturer reward you for your stupidity when you get launched through the windshield? If you blow it in a turn at double the posted limit and wind up in a tree (and susequently in a wheelchair, or dead) because you weren't wearing a belt, kudos to your car for ratting you out. Of course the fact that my career was ended and I was brought to the brink of bankruptcy because of a careless driver may have skewed my opinion on this subject...

That all being said (and I'm sure it didn't make much sense, I'm kinda looped on percoset right now suffering a major migraine), I believe that if the IIHS is so convinced this technology will reduce fraudulent claims, an amendment should be made to this law to force insurance companies to lower premiums for everyone that buys a car that contains it. If their costs decline they should pass those savings on to the customer. Of course that'll never happen...

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #8 – August 23, 2006, 11:35:03 PM

It sounds to me that is all about the money. More for uncle sam, more for the car manufactuer, more for the insurance company. More money from the tickets, more money for them not having to pay for that accident that you had, more money for the car maker due to having to take it to the dealer for anything. I also read some time ago about this. They even have it so if your car has something wrong with it that has to do with emissions that it can report you. Then they fine you for not getting your car fixed. They have even been able shut down the car remotely. I think it is all a big load of . Isn't this country supposed to be FREE? I guess I'm one of the few that see that we are doing nothing but voting our rights away. It just doesn't make any sense to have someone watching over you all the time because sooner or later your gonna screw up. Everyone should be aloud some screw ups. If they think they are gonna put that shiznit in my car I'm moving to Mexico or Canada.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #9 – August 23, 2006, 11:44:53 PM

Quote from: Thunder Chicken

I guess it boils down to this: My right to live outweighs your right to live in privacy.

If I hit you in your car with my car at 70 mph or 75 mph, (or 140 effective vs. 145 effective, in a head-on.. assuming you were doing the speed limit at the time) will you live through one accident and not the other? How is a little black box taking away just one more little bit of freedom going to change that situation any? 70 is a legal speed limit just 3 or 4 miles from my house.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #10 – August 24, 2006, 12:01:05 AM

Quote from: Bird351

If I hit you in your car with my car at 70 mph or 75 mph, (or 140 effective vs. 145 effective, in a head-on.. assuming you were doing the speed limit at the time) will you live through one accident and not the other? How is a little black box taking away just one more little bit of freedom going to change that situation any? 70 is a legal speed limit just 3 or 4 miles from my house.

True enough, but if you're travelling at 70 or 75 you're less likely to hit me than you would be if you were travelling at 120 or so. I was using speed as the cause of the accident, not the determining factor of the injury severity. That being said, and a littel more realistically, if the speed limit was 25 and you hit me doing that speed I'd be less likely to be injured or killed than if you were doing 70 (more than double, nearly triple the limit) when you hit me.

And to take me out of the picture entirely, you'd be a lot less likely to be hurt yourself if you hit a lamp post at 25 than if you hit it at 70, and if your car ratted you out for doing 70 in that 25 zone you'd be a lot less likely to get any sympathy from a jury or judge when you decided to sue Ford because you were injured by your own stupidity ("I dunno what happened, officer, I was just poking along at 30 when the car suddenly went out of control for no reason" wouldn't cut it anymore, would it?)...

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #11 – August 24, 2006, 12:11:40 AM

I'm not generally a fan of more laws. If there absolutely HAD to be another driving-related law on the book, I would much rather it be a complete ban on cell phone use while operating a moving vehicle. As it is, if I were to support such a law, I'd want to see some other law removed at the same time. I'd choose to lose seat belt laws, personally. If people want to go without seat belts, I say let 'em remove themselves from the gene pool. I'm not one of them. I have no problems with wearing a seat belt.

I'm not fond of the notion of being monitored everywhere I go, even though I don't go places where I'd have to worry about such things.

To be honest, I'm not the best person to ask about all this stuff. Frankly I'm close to the point (mentally and emotionally speaking) where I'll be ready to withdraw from this society completely.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #12 – August 24, 2006, 01:19:51 AM

Sooo why do these thing have to be GPS capable?

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #13 – August 24, 2006, 11:12:04 AM

I would like to take this moment to quote Captain Jean-Luc Picard:

Quote

A matter of internal security: the age-old cry of the oppressor.

Is big brother watching you?

Reply #14 – August 24, 2006, 04:26:55 PM

Quote

I would like to take this moment to quote Captain Jean-Luc Picard:

Quote:
A matter of internal security: the age-old cry of the oppressor.

he's comming to get you