What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
This Game Sucks view!
threadless.com - Grab this epic gaming tee for only $12 during the Threadless Holiday Sale!
77 Comments
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24Can't wait for the Black Box hacking tools to be released.
I'm going to buy that DeLorean I've always wanted and mod it to always display "traveling at 88MpH". When the police pull me over (of course, the next step with any Black Box will be GPS-enabled snooping and automatic police notification), I'll just say I was heading Back to the Future, and that it was an emergency, Marty's kid is in danger. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26How about instead, we mention it more, so that people might actually realize that they're giving up their freedoms for absolutely no good reason.
Maybe we should reference more up-to-date media.. V for Vendetta fan perhaps? - i440, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25I disagree. In fact, why stop there?
We should have cameras in our bedrooms, bathrooms, and every other place in our homes where there should obviously be a camera. These will have speakers attached to them, and the units will transmit live to a local government observatory. There, a group of carefully selected Observers will investigate your every move to make certain no illegal activity is conducted.
Just in case there aren't enough Observers, however, why not make all the streams available on the Internet? There, the entire public can examine the every moves of our citizens and promptly report any unlawful or suspicious activity. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17And you think insurance costs will go down because this new technology comes along?
What stops them from charging the same exact rates as they charge now with this new technology? Absolutely nothing. It's something you have to have to drive, so why not charge as much as possible while keeping as many people on the road as possible. Same algorithm applies for fuel prices.
You see, this technology changes nothing in the eyes of the Insurance Companies. Those black boxes should be as trustworthy as any other "Black Box" people don't understand; they're not tamperproof in any way, and the Feds are now trying to standardize them, meaning that one standard tool will be able to break all of them. I hit you in a car accident? Whoops, better get out my keyer before the police arrive, I'll have it looking like you hit me in no time. - sadsac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Next comes the law that makes it illegal to modify or remove the black box.
- willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Funny how you guys act like its the big govt conspiracy.
Look who is really behind this, I think you see the the insurance lobby.
They care little about violating your privacy, they care alot about saving a dollar. The little black boxes would give the insurance companies a way out of paying a lot of claims. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"Third, no such law will ever pass."
Would have agreed with you a couple years ago, but then the Digital Millennium Copyright Act got passed, then right after that the Patriot Act came riding in, and I lost all faith in the American legal system. - samiel86, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14I'm all for saving lives and what not, but can we say uber privacy violation? The burden of proof falls upon the state not the automakers.
- dukrous, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13This is not giving up any freedoms. There is no law mandating these boxes be in every car. So the anwwer is simple...vote with your wallets and buy the cars that don't have boxes. If enough people shun the black boxed cars, then guess what...no more boxes!
Me? I got no problem with it. Hopefully it will prove when ***** act like ***** and I don't get stuck with their repair bill. - willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"as the owner, you can do anything to your car as long as it is 'road worthy.'"
Not quite. Its illegal to remove the catalytic converter or change the emmisions system (even though many modern cars produce fewer emmisions without ti). - Akram, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9When the guy from Gizmondo crashed his Enzo, the police knew how fast he went because of its onboard computer than doesnt break.
Same goes for Prince Naseem the boxer and his SLR Mclaren he crashed.
Be Warned. if you are gonna go at 170mph, make sure your license plate doesn't say
PRINCE NAS and that you have 1 of the 4 cars in the UK. It won't be very hard to find you. - bjzq8, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9There are laws mandating this sort of equipment...it was pushed through years ago as "OBD-II" and "OBD-III" under the guise of "protecting our environment." See, with OBD-II, it keeps a record of when your car fails to meet emissions standards...and while we're there, why not keep lots more records? OBD-III will make it possible to upload these to a government office automatically...again, under the guise of "if your car is destroying the environment." The idea is that if your car is so out of tune to be asphyxiating bunnies and melting ice caps, then the government can remotely shut it down. They can also tell if you haven't gotten your yearly inspection, and turn it off that way too. It's all a plan by the nannies to keep you in your crib. And everybody fell for it to "save the earth."
- BionicBeefpile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7FTA, there is a line from Progressive Insurance where they say something to the effect of "Safer drivers should have to pay less". This is total BS. Safer drivers *already* pay less, because they don't have tickets/accidents on their record.
They try to cloak it in language to make it sound "nice to good people", but it's really just a big privacy invasion turd that no amount of polish can clean up. - EtaoinShrdlu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Satellite tracking is stupid. Simple roadside detector working on car-mounted transponders will be far more effective; GPS simply does not work in the city and offers too coarse a resolution to effectively tell where exactly a car travels.
Besides this, the most effective way to tax road usage is by a tax on fuel; the more fuel you use, the more tax you pay, and furthermore, it is directly tied tot he weight of your car, so you pay according to the amount of damages you inflict on roads. - willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"I think the insurance co's should be forced to download this after a accident."
Who do you think is behind this? - brufleth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah really, welcome to the US of A, any law that removes a right can be passed. Its those pesky laws the protect rights that are always in jeopardy.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Does the US Constitution confer on government the power of determining how you can travel? "Driving is a privilege" is a commonplace lie, perpetuated by cops and their booklickers.
- skeeto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Wait until those sensors on the highway start reading your license plate and then auto-mail you a ticket (or auto-deduct it from your bank account like those EZPass services do) if you're going even a couple miles above the posted limit. Oh wait, that's already being tested in some parts of the country.
- westy411, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6What ever happened to the 5th amendment right against self incrimination??? Having your own car turn states evidence.... jesus why dont we just make all loyal citizens take truth serum and undergo water boarding until they tell the police everything they might have been doing that the government might not like...... WTF has happened to this country in my short life. Everyday another liberty slips away
- derekbez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Speed does NOT kill. Reckless driving does.
Why is the random number 110 in UK not the same as the random number 130 in other parts of Europe? Are they better drivers? Am I a better driver when I go to Germany? Who chose these numbers anyway?
Do not try and exceed the limit. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
What truth?
There is no limit.
There is no limit?
Then you'll see, that it is not the limit that exceeds, it is only yourself. - vann, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I remember years ago when OnStar was just coming around and there was this commercial where someone had locked their keys in the car. They rang up OnStar, explained the situation, and suddenly their car doors unlocked.
I thought it was pretty crazy then. Are people now just catching on? - joelito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Oh, I can see it now.
In order to get insurance for your shiny new car, you must take your car to a driving behaviour test. This is needed to determine your quote.
Of course, they should start improving the technology to track driving behaviours on longer periods of time...
But soon enough, it could happen. - bruce89, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5They want to bring in satellite tracking in Britain, so they can charge people by what roads they are on.
- xhadow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yep, once they get that commercialized its only a matter of time before its hacked and can be modded which in turn will invalidate the whole thing. Its just like testing for steroids the people who still take it will probably never get caught because the do their best to stay one or two steps ahead of the game.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@subESC
Cops lie all the time about pretexts for searches. Tinted windows are for privacy. Cars should come with windows you can turn opaque. - Kahnza, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I wonder if my 93 GrandAm has a black box. I would guess not.
- skeeto, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5OnStar is interesting technology, but it's pretty scary when you really think about the power they have over your car and the ability to track it.
- leftfoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There is no spoon.
- B111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They already exist to some extent, the aftermarket industry has been making reprogammers for a while, shortly after OBDII. Of course it would be trivial to disable the monitoring tools, unless the feds make it illegal.
Even still, I have heard of open source OBD-II projects out there, when I flirted with the idea of building a car pc. - OperatorNo9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@geminitojanus
I'm all for an up-to-date replacement but it should be one that people have seen. - skeeto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Oh look, another issue the "tin foil hat" wearing kooks have been talking about for years now being admitted/published in the mainstream press.
- Nicklogan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Anyways...back to the original topic, here is a list of GM vehicle an location of the boxes...scroll down http://www.airbagcrash.com/sdmairbagtechinfo.html
- dougbdl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have heard the legal argument that the owner of the car owns the box, and by extension the data.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ willcode
exactly - you took the words right out of my mouth (keyboard?). you'll find the insurance lobby behind many or even most of these nanny-state type laws: helmet laws, seatbelt laws, anti-smoking laws, etc. every time they add on yet another rule telling you how to live, always look to see who stands to benefit financially. - JAGUART, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The age of DRM?
Driving Rights Management? - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4From what? From people questioning their lies about what they saw in "plain view?"
- mcs218, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Here is a list of cars the have data recorders that can be read with Vetronix software.
Links to PDF
http://www.harristechnical.com/downloads/cdrlist.pdf - willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"You can only drive a car if you show competence in handling it, and knowledge of the laws regarding the roads."
Yet, in most states the written test is 20 questions and you only have to get 15 correct. Seems like the test should be 100 questions and cetain one should be mandatory (like what to do at a red light). Maybe we should make getting a drivers license more like getting a pilots license. Make it mandatory for drivers to carry around a book of the laws concerning the road (like FARs) and know them. Also, make the driving test more than a trip around the block. Add certifications for different types of vehicles, SUV, sports cars, etc... - synmoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Window tint laws are meant to protect police officers.
- bradjlw6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3yup you all say no law would pass saying the black box had to be in the car.....or ooopppsss i shorted out the system......kinda like a cat has to be on the exhaust system, or you have to have a certain color turn signal light (amber) or how about a drop vinyl on the windshield cant be any lower then 3 inches and also has to be see threw....or how about the window tint laws, what purpose exactly dose a window being black or clear have to do with road safety, in my eyes if i ain't looking at the goof ball driving in the lain beside me while he is chowing down on his McDonald's lunch and talking on the cell at the same time then that's one less distraction, yet the law is their in form of inspections....I'm sure you all get my drift
- craptacuIar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"The article fails to point out that, first of all, driving is a privilege, not a right."
Correct. That is why we take Driver's Ed (or required licensed private driving lessons in some States) and are required to pass an exam, with periodic checks of our vision and reaction times when we get our licenses renewed.
"And second, driving on a public road cannot be considered a “private” act, and one has no expectation of privacy while doing it."
So we can expect to be able to disable a vehicle's "black box" when we are driving on private property?
"Putting event recorders on every cars is no different than putting policemen on every street corner; if the later is legal, why shouldn’t the first be?"
Again, this assumes that the only proper use for an auto is on a public street.
"Automobiles have killed more people than all the wars in recorded history; it is time that the authorities do something to protect the public from the increasing number of reckless drivers that roam our roads ... and recording the behaviour of every motorist is a proper step in this direction."
Why don't we just outlaw anything that could be potentially dangerous? Life is dangerous, and as adults we should be free to choose what is or is not acceptable risk.
A "black box" plan treads too far into our civil liberties without the payoff that something like tougher licensing tests or higher driver's education standards would have. - bilbus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10I’m all for it, I think the insurance co's should be forced to download this after a accident.
This would cut down on he said/she said car accidents. If a box like this can show the other’s party’s insurance co that I was not speeding, and the other person was I am all for it. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Then let me opt out. You can drive around with a digital fink if you like.
- izzie2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They were doing it in Arizona in 1990. So cameras at every red light are just for traffic flow data?Puhleese
- qwickone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3While I agree that you shouldnt expect privacy while driving on a public road, I expect some degree of privacy when using my private property. If they want to put motion cameras all over the road that can determine speed, well go right ahead. I just dont think it's right to put it in my private property.
- plutarch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Point 1: It's only 20 seconds of data, it's basically an eyewitness to the way you were driving right before an accident. I think it's a worthwhile piece of technology so long as habits aren't tracked over long periods of time.
Point 2: Check out what this jackass says in the 2nd paragraph of the article, and I quote:
"The minute the prosecutors had the speed from the 'black box,' they upped the charges to murder," says Richard Slade, whose son Blake was driving the Mercedes. "They had what they needed to force a plea down our throats."
You're ***** right they upped the charges. They should have forced it to go to trial for murder. These 2 worthless sacks of human ***** were going 139 down a road in a car race, and because of their callous disregard for anyone else, they KILLED TWO OTHER PEOPLE.
I can't believe those 2 punks got off with only 3 years in jail. I'm 23 so this isn't one of those "damn kids" rants. They should be locked up for 20+ years for what they did. This was no mere accident, they weren't going 5-10 over, they were being incredibly reckless and irresponsible and they were old enough to know exactly what they were doing. - edmcguirk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It wouldn't be so bad if you could actually trust the data. While the numbers might be technically correct, they might not tell the whole story.
It's easy to say someone who was droving 100 MPH was at fault, but what happens when it's not so clear cut?
How about someone who runs a red light and you hit them going 10 MPH over the limit? You can bet some lawyer will be screaming that you are the danger to humanity.
====================================
the director of San Diego's Collision Safety Institute: "Only paranoid alarmist pinheads suggest this technology could be expanded to spy on our everyday driving."
====================================
When the technology is so cheap that it is actually free, they will be recording your every move. When the opportunity is there to add a revenue stream for every infraction, you can bet they will try to implement automatic bank debits.
good luck... - techiemike, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Slade's father Richard calls it "a violation of civil rights"
I say it is "a violation of civil rights" to allow your kid to drive around suburban New York in a $50,000 car with no real driving experience, and actually taking away the civil rights of the nurse and her fiance who are now dead. I think those kids should have had a higher sentence, even without the black box.
I do agree that the black box is an invasion of privacy and there should be a way to disable. It would be good to get a discount on insurance for having the box though. - Wuss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For all you VW and Audi owners, a tool does exists to manipluate your cars ECU (electronic control unit). VW and Audi modders have been doing it for years.
http://www.ross-tech.com/
It's not so much a "hack" as it is an actual replication of the diagnostic tool that dealers use, plus a lot more. You can scan,read and manipulate almost every aspect of the ECU's function.
It's $230 bucks, but consider this. A diagnostic computer scan at the dealership runs 80-90 buck, so use it a few times and it already pays for itself.
I was a minor victim of "monitoring". When my Golf 1.8t went into service, the dealer tried to pull some anti-warranty service crap by pointing out that my driving is very agressive. The ECU tracks and averages out my average speed and RPM shift points.
Anyways, it's a must have for any VW/Audi owner. Much more powerful and more intuitive then most of the other open market diagnostic tools you can buy for some other makes. - Stecchino, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"In Georgia, after a train hit a car, the lone auto survivor sued the railroad for $12 million. But a jury threw out the case when the car's EDR revealed it had halted on the tracks before the crash."
-
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is