Yes, a little known fact. A spy is installed on newer cars today. It is similiar to the black box on an aircraft. It records speed, braking, gas pedal movement, inertia and many other data points while you operate your vehicle.
After an accident law enforcement will d'laod data from it and determine the movement of your vehicle. If it shows you were speeding or whatever other illegal movement you may be issued a summons.
All this data is recorded in your Air Bag computer. Big brother is taking another step to watch over your every move.
Posted by david drane (Member # 507) on :
Scary isn't it? Where do they go next Our bedrooms?? Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Kool!
Now all we have to do is govern the motor for 62.5 miles an hour to save fuel....
I mean this! As most Tractors/Trailers are governed..Because they only get at best 7.5 - 9 miles to the gallon of diesel. Posted by Joe Rees (Member # 211) on :
Steven, I think they already have a governor for cars - its called a speeding ticket. The idea of computer data being used against me in a court of law bothers me. Unless I at least have the option of deciding whether to have it on or off, that seems blatantly invasive. I should have a choice of whether I want to volunteer that personal data. If that is ok, then so is tracking devices that will relay your coordinates at any given moment. It's only a short step from there to installing sensors in the steering wheel that will also monitor my heart rate or skin chemistry to detect if I have used a substance or was otherwise physically impaired beyond someone's idea of an acceptable 'norm'. Scary.
Posted by Mike Pipes (Member # 1573) on :
Yep, it's well known the vehicles are recording all this information, and have been for quite some time. It's been required since January 1996, and some vehicles built as early as 1994 are equipped too.
The next version, OBD-III is an enhanced version of the same system but also includes GPS tracking capabilities, two-way radio communications (telemetry) between the car's computer and roadside stations to monitor emissions/speed/vehicle condition/etc., and there is also talk of incorporating a method for law enforcement to not only track vehicles, but disable vehicles by remote to avoid car chases and reduce theft.
Personally, I like the ability to plug in a laptop, scan the system for problems and alter the performance of the engine, but that sneaky stuff needs to go.
Posted by Stephen Faulkner (Member # 2511) on :
Looking at a 55 panel truck for the shop..... one more good reason to buy it!
Posted by Stephen Deveau (Member # 1305) on :
Joe They have them too! In Tractors (18 wheels) to make sure they know you are Alive or Dead!
(Then so is tracking devices that will relay your coordinates at any given moment. It's only a short step from there to installing sensors in the steering wheel that will also monitor)
GPS is a neat item as I hike in the woods all the time and that pup helps out! Posted by Brian Snyder (Member # 41) on :
Yeah, but..... You'd have to allow the download by consenting to a warrant. And, its the right of all citizens to not be compelled to furnish evidence against themselves, AKA self-indrimination.
Posted by Joey Madden (Member # 1192) on :
I personally think its a good idea as I saw something about it on the Discovery channel. They can actually get the data from the box and see from it what was going on before and during the accident. I don't know how you feel about accidents but my feelings are that there are too many persons who can't drive, then put the blame on the other driver or worse yet say the vehicle lost its brakes, etc. There are way to many excuses while holding a cellular in one hand and a cup of coffee in the other hand expecting others to foot the bill. This can certainly stop alot of mickey mouse lawsuits that congest the courts.
On another note, all my vehicles are pre-1973, except the billboard I drive for work 88 astrovan.
1 more thing: Brian, In order to collect insurance on your vehicles damage, the insurance company has a right to know exactly what happened before and during the accident, which leaves that theory out the window if you want to collect.
[ August 20, 2003, 09:18 PM: Message edited by: Joey Madden ]
Posted by Brian Snyder (Member # 41) on :
quote: I personally think its a good idea as I saw something about it on the Discovery channel.
Its a good *idea* but I don't think its ready yet and if/when it truly is ready whats next? A black box on your body? I'm sure your health insurer would love to find a way to deny a claim for breaking your arm while ice skating. "sorry, we see you were sliding on ice when your arm was fractured. According to your policy thats a no-no."
quote:They can actually get the data from the box and see from it what was going on before and during the accident.
Yes, but the data is then up for interpretation. The interpretation is concern number one.
quote: then put the blame on the other driver or worse yet say the vehicle lost its brakes, etc.
Brakes systems do fail. It happens. So do computer systems. Concern number two... Can we be certain the OBD system will accurately record an event?
For example..... BMW released their new M3 model with a brand new 3.2L engine in 2001. These cars were available with either a 6 speed manual or a SMG transmission. The SMG transmission was availble about 9 months after the manual transmission cars were released. SMG is a true F1 style clutchless manual transmission. Through programming, SMG it will not allow the car to rev beyond 7,800 rpms. Lots of engines were blowing up. BUT, the DME (Digital Motor Electronics) records peak speed, peak rpm and elapsed time over 7800 rpm. So, BMW was reading the computer and finding the owners of these cars were at fault because the DME showed revs over 7,800 rpms. Owners disputed this but were SOL. The computer doesn't lie, right? These owners were responsible for replacing their $17k engines.
Then the SMG equipped cars hit the shores. They CAN'T rev over 7,800 rpm because they are computer controlled to stop reving beyond 7,800 rpm. These motors were blowing up too! But how? Ah, the power of the internet. A nice little website was formed for affected M3 owners to track which cars had failed engines and why.
SMG equiped cars were blowing up and were showing DME data in the 8,100-8400 rpm region. BMW couldn't acuse SMG owners of being at fault since they clearly could not have mis shifted their car.
A year later, after looking at the data, its been determined that the cars with failed engines were built during a stretch of 7 specific build weeks. There was no correlation to which transmission was used. Most engines failed at about 6,000 miles, over-reving was not the cause and data was inaccurately logged.
quote:In order to collect insurance on your vehicles damage, the insurance company has a right to know exactly what happened before and during the accident, which leaves that theory out the window if you want to collect.
That'll be fair if/when the accuracy of the data can be counted on. Until then, claim or not, the owner of the car has ownership of the data and this information is privileged in a civil proceeding. The data is protected in a criminal proceeding under the Fifth Amendment and these protections can only be waived by the accused. So, for now, your options are limited but it is your choice.
Posted by Scott Daniels (Member # 3455) on :
Along the same lines, has anyone thought about those devices that allow you to pay your toll fees without having to stop? In Illinois, they're called "IPASS." They know who you are, where you've been and where you'll probably be next along with how long you've taken to get between any two toll booths.
When will the tickets start rolling in for speeding?
Posted by Joey Madden (Member # 1192) on :
I still like it for persons like you Brian Posted by old paint (Member # 549) on :
brian...since this federal govt has taken over in 2000, YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS.....and if you dont think so check with the ACLU!!!!!!!
Posted by Brian Snyder (Member # 41) on :
Thanks Joey. If we should ever "accidentally" meet I'll make sure I'm driving my OBD free '88 CRX.
Joe- Doesn't mean I have to "throw in the towel" and welcome Big Brother just yet.
Scott- We have EZpass in NJ.
quote:They know who you are, where you've been and where you'll probably be next along with how long you've taken to get between any two toll booths. When will the tickets start rolling in for speeding?
They know your account name and number, where the transponder has been and how long it took to get there but they'd have to prove YOU were driving the vehicle to issue you a summons. If it was easy enough for the state the make this a new revenue stream they'd have done it years ago. Posted by old paint (Member # 549) on :
at least 2 of us will vote for change of regeim!!!!
Posted by Ryan E Young (Member # 2325) on :
73 chevy truck. The newest vehicle I own.
[ August 21, 2003, 01:41 PM: Message edited by: Ryan E Young ]
Posted by Bill Preston (Member # 1314) on :
Have to go with Joey on this one, and I have a lot less problem with this than some of the other stuff that has come along lately i.e. the Patriot Act, detention without being charged, no access to a lawyer, etc.
Without actually knowing where this all started, I would guess that the insurance industry as much as, or more than the government is involved in promoting it. Assuming that the makers of these tattletales get it right and the data recorded is accurate, then if nothing else it should help in accident reconstruction and get some of the outright lying disproved in court. It might even promote a bit of taking resposibility for one's own actions----but I won't hold my breath on that one.
On the ticket for getting there too soon---the thruway has time stamped cards they give you when you get on. Show up too soon at your exit and it doesn't take a black box to figure you've been speeding.
On the need for a warrant to download info from the box--- this one makes me wonder if the implied consent thing doesn't apply. Same deal as when you get a drivers license---it is implied that you will consent to a sobriety check if the occasion arises. By accepting the license, you have in effect given your consent.
Just an opinion here---but given the "me first, screw you" attitude that seems to be the normal thing out on the roads these days, maybe a little big brother isn't such a bad idea. Too many people out there seem to think that all that is needed to drive is an ignition key, a gas pedal, a real loud horn, no brakes, and a working middle finger.
I'm frankly sick and tired of all the bitching about the invasion of privacy when it comes to things like surveillance cameras at street corners and traffic lights. Your privacy rights end at just about the point that your front bumper comes through my grille work.
FWIW, and flame away.
Posted by Mark Perkins (Member # 296) on :
I remember watching a news clip about a car rental agency somewhere in the northeast that had some small print in the rental contract that if you were caught speeding in that rental you would then be responsible for addditional charges. The company had GPS systems mounted in the cars and would track them and show the renter when he returned the car where he was speeding and how fast he went....cha ching...until a angry customer got the media involved. If I remember correctly that company isn't doing that anymore
Posted by Brian Snyder (Member # 41) on :
Nice truck Ryan!
You're right Mark. Their action was found to be illegal in court. I think it was because the renters were not aware of the possibility of being charged a fee for speeding, IIRC.
I'm all for the GRIP movement (Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians) Joe. www.griponline.com
quote: On the need for a warrant to download info from the box--- this one makes me wonder if the implied consent thing doesn't apply. Same deal as when you get a drivers license---it is implied that you will consent to a sobriety check if the occasion arises. By accepting the license, you have in effect given your consent.
Bill- In NJ you are given the opportunity to either consent or refuse. There are stiff penalties if you do refuse but the choice is yours. Breathalyzer equipment can read a false positive. BMW has shown that data can be logged inaccurately. I understand nothing is perfect but I believe this black box technology is probaly still a long way off from being implemented positively. I'd would like to see that happen but I just don't have faith in it yet.
I agree, the "me first, screw you" attitude stinks. But, when the government is the "me" in that equation you're really screwed. We have camera's on the highway and people still speed. We have mandatory minimums and the death penalty and people still sell drugs and commit murder. Spending money on a deterrent will not affect the guy who thinks "all that is needed to drive is an ignition key, a gas pedal, a real loud horn, no brakes, and a working middle finger". Its all about morals....but I'll stop now cause, being on a signmaker website, I probaly should have never got started. Posted by Glenn S. Harris (Member # 2190) on :
I wonder if you can edithe information with that Car Hacker program?
Posted by Bill Preston (Member # 1314) on :
Hi Brian, Ackshully, I was hoping you would come back in on this---we can agree to disagree, and go from there.
We have the same right to refuse a breathalyzer test here in NY, and most likely the same penalties. The fastest way I can think of to get a false positive on that would be for a diabetic who's headed for trouble and whose breath smells of acetone. Cough syrup too.
On the tech accuracy point--it may be a ways off, but consider the black boxes the airlines use. If they record accurately, can't the same technology be applied to auto data recorders?
On the "me" being the government and we are all screwed---in spite of some of our fearless leaders (plural) recent actions, in general I don't think they are out to get us.
And, I have to agree that some of the snoop type deterrents don't seem to have done the job, and morals or lack of same plays a big part in the problems. On the other hand, would the situations with traffic and disregard of the laws governing it only get worse without these gadgets?
Sure, this whole subject is way the hell and gone OT, but we all drive and are subject to whatever some nitwit can throw at us. My father, who died in '68 used to say that if there were only 100 FAH drivers in the country, 98 of them would be here in Otsego County, #99 would have just left, and #100 was on his way. IMHO, it has only gotten worse.
BTW, anyone see that story on this eve's news about the SD politician who ran the stop sign and collided with the motorcyclist and killed him? This pol has a traffic rap sheet about as long as your arm, and he's still out there. Maybe one of these devices would have taken him out of circulation.
NAAAAAAAAH--power and political influence and all that. Too much to hope for.
Posted by Brian Snyder (Member # 41) on :
Bill- Yep, mouthwash has the same effect. Funny you should bring up the airlines. I just finished watching a show on TLC about the A.A. Flight #587 crash in NY in 2001. Data recorded from that flight, and the interpretation of it, has been argued for so long that AA and Airbus decided to split the damage claims 50/50. Of course, they and their insurance companies will both still fight it out to determine liability. Sure, the data was useful to a great extent but it still hasn't determined liability.
I don't think the government is "out to get us" either. But there is something to be said for politicians that work only to benefit their own self-interests.
I heard about that politician a few days ago. Its a shame but I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that he isn't charged with any more than running a stop sign. He had 12 speeding tickets in 5 years and 7 accidents in the last 10 years. Only the cost of a NJ auto insurance policy would stop that man from driving. Posted by Jackie B (Member # 186) on :
No matter what the gov't throws at you, personal responsibility is the key. How many people are actually honest enough to admit to drinking while driving, admit to speeding, admit to using a cell phone, or any other thing that endagers us all? Perhaps it's not just the gov't, but the people instead. Our community just lost a beautiful, vibrant, young 9 year old girl to a "possible" drunk driver. "Possible" drunk driver fled the scene. By the time they catch him, it will be too late for a blood alcohol test. Lord knows what other excuse will be provided for slamming into another car. A family lost their young daughter, simply put, due to lack of personal responsibility. If people can't be trusted/responsible, then maybe they should be watched. Don't get me wrong, I abhore "Big Brother" - but then again . . . As my husband likes to say "it's time to weed the herd".
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
