Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Event Data Recorders (Black Boxes) In Your Car

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like

    Event Data Recorders (Black Boxes) In Your Car

    So, according to: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/09/government-touts-crash-recorders-privacy-advocates-sound-alarm/[/url]

    The Federal Govt. is considering mandating that all passenger vehicles have an Event Data Recorder (Black Box), for purposes of safety.

    At current, no word on who would own that data (Driver, manufacturer, Govt.) and what privacy rights the vehicle owner would posess, and what power the Govt. would have to view/track such data.

    So...

    Thoughts? Pro, Con, and why?

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    2,516
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3955751]So, according to: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/09/government-touts-crash-recorders-privacy-advocates-sound-alarm/[/url]

    The Federal Govt. is considering mandating that all passenger vehicles have an Event Data Recorder (Black Box), for purposes of safety.

    At current, no word on who would own that data (Driver, manufacturer, Govt.) and what privacy rights the vehicle owner would posess, and what power the Govt. would have to view/track such data.

    So...

    Thoughts? Pro, Con, and why?[/QUOTE]

    Think its a good idea. Theres been 2 major cases of Sudden Acceleraton cases that in the end (so far) have been determined due to driver error. Audi in the 80s and Toyota recently. Takes these companies years to get their reputational image back. If its due to the automakers than the consumer will have evidence. If its a bull**** lawsuit by someone trying to scam money than the automakers have evidence.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=TokyoJetsFan;3955786]Think its a good idea. Theres been 2 major cases of Sudden Acceleraton cases that in the end (so far) have been determined due to driver error. Audi in the 80s and Toyota recently. Takes these companies years to get their reputational image back. If its due to the automakers than the consumer will have evidence. If its a bull**** lawsuit by someone trying to scam money than the automakers have evidence.[/QUOTE]

    This didn't even cross my mind when I read OP but great point.

    Also, I understand the rights to freedoms... However, a black box in my car doesn't personally affect any freedom I feel I have in this country.

    Honest question, as I'm at a loss and may not be looking at it from your intended view point, Fish.

    What would be the downside?

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has the gov't stated that the block box will have use GPS data as well? If that is the case it should be up to the consumer to give consent for actual GPS real time data, if there is no GPS, there is no privacy issue. Anyone with ONSTAR complaining?

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3955751]So, according to: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/09/government-touts-crash-recorders-privacy-advocates-sound-alarm/[/url]

    The Federal Govt. is considering mandating that all passenger vehicles have an Event Data Recorder (Black Box), for purposes of safety.

    At current, no word on who would own that data (Driver, manufacturer, Govt.) and what privacy rights the vehicle owner would posess, and what power the Govt. would have to view/track such data.

    So...

    Thoughts? Pro, Con, and why?[/QUOTE]

    My thought is that this is insanity. The nanny state government is slowly chipping away at out privacy inch by inch to the point where the next generation won't blink twice when obstetricians inject newborns with RF tags.
    Last edited by FF2; 02-09-2011 at 09:31 PM.

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfield County, CT
    Posts
    6,870
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think we have headed down this road already (excuse the pun)...

    Who owns the data from my EZ Pass ??

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,155
    Post Thanks / Like
    Would it be recording stuff I'm doing in the backseat?

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    13,518
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3955821][B]Has the gov't stated that the block box will have use GPS data as well?[/B] If that is the case it should be up to the consumer to give consent for actual GPS real time data, if there is no GPS, there is no privacy issue. Anyone with ONSTAR complaining?[/QUOTE]

    This is where i might have an issue with this. If it's done strictly for the purposes Tokyo mentioned, then I have no problem with it.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    as the roads are public areas I dont see the right for privacy argument holding water. It would be useful in determining what actually happens in these accidents... and like plane travel, would make it safer.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti;3956317]as the roads are public areas I dont see the right for privacy argument holding water. It would be useful in determining what actually happens in these accidents... and like plane travel, would make it safer.[/QUOTE]

    You are right Bit, there is zero expectation of privacy "once" you leave your residence, but there lies the issue, if the black box only runs when the car is running then is not a big issue, but still an issue.

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti;3956317]as the roads are public areas I dont see the right for privacy argument holding water. It would be useful in determining what actually happens in these accidents... and like plane travel, would make it safer.[/QUOTE]

    So if there is no right to privacy, would you support the Govt. having no limit (i.e. no court order required) to access that data? For example, having a Govt, database that tracks all your movements at all time with the vehicle?

    If there is no right to privacy in activity on a public road, there is hence no right to hide such data from the Govt., or from the public via the usual information request channels.

    Would you support the issuance of fines/tickets to all drivers who break speed limits or make turns without signaling, etc., based on this collected data?

    Also, perhaps, for "dangerous operation" of any vehicle that does not at that moment meet inspections standards set up by say, a Federal Highway Safety Commission Panel?

    Beyond that, you could set up a tax-system for road useage. The system could already track every mile you drive and where, it's a small step to move to generation of a "Useage Tax" to charge each driver (based on last filed income, taxes must be progressive to be fair) for their use of this public resource.

    Such a change would certainly make for a slower pace of life, and bolster the coffers of local and state jurisdictions. I do hope you take the time to reply.
    Last edited by Warfish; 02-10-2011 at 02:19 PM.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3956403]So if there is no right to privacy, would you support the Govt. having no limit (i.e. no court order required) to access that data? For example, having a Govt, database that tracks all your movements at all time with the vehicle?

    If there is no right to privacy in activity on a public road, there is hence no right to hide such data from the Govt., or from the public via the usual information request channels.

    Would you support the issuance of fines/tickets to all drivers who break speed limits or make turns without signaling, etc., based on this collected data?

    Also, perhaps, for "dangerous operation" of any vehicle that does not at that moment meet inspections standards set up by say, a Federal Highway Safety Commission Panel?

    Beyond that, you could set up a tax-system for road useage. The system could already track every mile you drive and where, it's a small step to move to generation of a "Useage Tax" to charge each driver (based on last filed income, taxes must be progressive to be fair) for their use of this public resource.

    Such a change would certainly make for a slower pace of life, and bolster the coffers of local and state jurisdictions. I do hope you take the time to reply.[/QUOTE]

    Take a step back, the technology exists already and the gov't doesn't have the time nor resources to do the things you are bringing up in your post.

    You have zero expectation of privacy when walking/driving in public areas.

    There is a ton legal oversight when it comes to monitoring a U.S. citizen for criminal actions now.

  13. #13
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3956412]Take a step back, the technology exists already and the gov't doesn't have the time nor resources to do the things you are bringing up in your post.

    You have zero expectation of privacy when walking/driving in public areas.

    There is a ton legal oversight when it comes to monitoring a U.S. citizen for criminal actions now.[/QUOTE]

    Thats not what I asked.

    Would people support such actions, based on the lack of privacy rights (which, if true, makes all of my suggestions perfectly legal), or not, and if not, why not?

    While technology to track exists, it is not in anything close to the wealth of data vehicular black boxes would provide, and all of my suggestions (I assure you) are things the Govt. will consider should they become mandated in all vehicles.

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3956421]Thats not what I asked.

    Would people support such actions, based on the lack of privacy rights (which, if true, makes all of my suggestions perfectly legal), or not, and if not, why not?

    While technology to track exists, it is not in anything close to the wealth of data vehicular black boxes would provide, and all of my suggestions (I assure you) are things the Govt. will consider should they become mandated in all vehicles.[/QUOTE]

    Wealth of data? What wealth would that be?

  15. #15
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;3956424]Wealth of data? What wealth would that be?[/QUOTE]

    You know what CR, I'm not playing the same old CR Deflection game today.

    If you want to go in every direction OTHER than actually answering the issue asked, I'll simply ignore you, and hope Bitonti has more interest in an actual discussion.:rolleyes:

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3956426]You know what CR, I'm not playing the same old CR Deflection game today.

    If you want to go in every direction OTHER than actually answering the issue asked, I'll simply ignore you, and hope Bitonti has more interest in an actual discussion.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    The gov't currently uses GPS tracking devices and I am very familiar with this area, but hey I'm deflecting? I am confused by what information you think a GPS black box can get someone or the gov't.

    OnStar has been out for quite some time and no one is screaming about it.

  17. #17
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3956403]So if there is no right to privacy, would you support the Govt. having no limit (i.e. no court order required) to access that data? For example, having a Govt, database that tracks all your movements at all time with the vehicle?

    If there is no right to privacy in activity on a public road, there is hence no right to hide such data from the Govt., or from the public via the usual information request channels.

    Would you support the issuance of fines/tickets to all drivers who break speed limits or make turns without signaling, etc., based on this collected data?

    Also, perhaps, for "dangerous operation" of any vehicle that does not at that moment meet inspections standards set up by say, a Federal Highway Safety Commission Panel?

    Beyond that, you could set up a tax-system for road useage. The system could already track every mile you drive and where, it's a small step to move to generation of a "Useage Tax" to charge each driver (based on last filed income, taxes must be progressive to be fair) for their use of this public resource.

    Such a change would certainly make for a slower pace of life, and bolster the coffers of local and state jurisdictions. I do hope you take the time to reply.[/QUOTE]

    Quoting to ask Bit again. CR....have a nice day.

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    2,516
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;3956421]Thats not what I asked.

    Would people support such actions, based on the lack of privacy rights (which, if true, makes all of my suggestions perfectly legal), or not, and if not, why not?

    While technology to track exists, it is not in anything close to the wealth of data vehicular black boxes would provide, and all of my suggestions (I assure you) are things the Govt. will consider should they become mandated in all vehicles.[/QUOTE]

    I see your point Fish, but the Govt is in my opinion trying to avoid what happened to Toyota to one of the American Big 3 automakers. Toyota has lost over half a billion dollars in market cap on their stock since these charges against them that have so far proved to be driver error. Add add on the lost revenue and lost confidence in their product over a he said / she said scenario. The govt wants to avoid that happening in the future to one of our Big 3...especially since they are invested through bailouts.

  19. #19
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=TokyoJetsFan;3956446]I see your point Fish, but the Govt is in my opinion trying to avoid what happened to Toyota to one of the American Big 3 automakers. Toyota has lost over half a billion dollars in market cap on their stock since these charges against them that have so far proved to be driver error. Add add on the lost revenue and lost confidence in their product over a he said / she said scenario. The govt wants to avoid that happening in the future to one of our Big 3...especially since they are invested through bailouts.[/QUOTE]

    Perhaps Toyota should persue libel/defamation damages against the U.S. Media who reported the issue as fact without anything to back it up.

    Frankly, and yes this is OT, the US Media as a whole is long overdue some serious legal action for how it reports "news" with almost no verification, and no thought of how much damage their oft fact-deficient reporting can cause.

    Freedom of the Press is not Freedom to destroy without proof.

    /end OT.

  20. #20
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    ***************NOT INTENDED FOR WARFISH*********************

    This has been a on-going thing with this type of tracking technology.

    [url]https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/8235-Geo-Location-Tracking-Data-and-Your-Privacy.html[/url]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us