Black Boxes to Track Driving Habits? 867
Another submitter sent in a related submission about the collision data recorders in many late-model cars - which serve a similar purpose as the black boxes described above, but generally only record the last five seconds before an accident.
geemon writes "With the recent stories of rental car companies using GPS to track how and where their patrons are using their vehicles, this information about autos from 1996 and newer having an airplane-like accident "black box" capability was a complete surprise. Tucked under the drivers seat of most GM vehicles, the "black box" can store a variety of info such as vehicle and engine speed, braking, and seat belt usage. Info from an accident reconstruction service that uses this data can be found here. Called "event data recorders", these devices were, "...Originally designed to improve air bag performance based on the severity of the collision, the event data recorder can tell traffic accident investigators about the car's speed; engine RPMs; how far the accelerator pedal was pressed; if the brakes were applied; whether the drivers seatbelt was buckled and what warning lights were on - all from five seconds before impact..." It seems that GM and perhaps Ford have been using this for some time. Here is one company that makes the Windows based retrieval hardware/software combo for $2500. Imagine the uses of this data that law enforcement, your insurance company, and lawyers may have after your next little mishap."
It is there already! (Score:4, Funny)
If you are in an accident and the other party's insurance company takes the vehicle, they will check the black box to try to shift the liability from their client onto you.
Re:It is there already! (Score:2)
BTW, does anybody know if this game runs under Wine? I would love to play it again, except that I toasted my Windows partition.
Re:It is there already! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:or if used properly (Score:3)
That is just such a load.
Open your newspaper up some time. You'll find that there are more accidents involving teenagers than you think. When mommy and daddy stop paying for the insurance you may discover this as well. Especially if you're unfortunate enough to purchase the same model of car that parents give to their irresponsible teenagers when they turn 16; your insurance rates will take your breath away.
I've been driving for thirty years with no moving violations but have had two accidents: both caused by teenagers. (Rear-ended at a red stop light by a seventeen year old doing 40 and broadsided a sixteen year old who didn't look for oncoming traffic and pulled right out into traffic from a stop sign.)
No.
The accidents are then caused by idiots who think that their time is so important that everyone else should just pull off the road until these very important people pass. But when nobody clears the road for them, they begin weaving in and out of traffic and creating a very dangerous situation. George Carlin had a great suggestion for such people: ``Leave earlier!'' (I know a cop you told me a story once with a guy that he pulled over for driving like a foot off someone's rear bumber, eventually passing the front car in a no passing zone, and in a school zone to boot. He argued with the cop, insisting that the posted speed limit was the minimum speed that you were supposed to be driving and that the driver in the other car should have been getting a ticket. The driver who did get the three tickets was nineteen. Hee hee.)
Much of what you see on the roads nowadays would, at one time, earn you a reckless driving citation and possibly the opportunity to lose your license altogether. Perhaps its time they started enforcing those laws once again. I only have a 25 minute commute to work and I manage to see a lot of boneheaded drivers. The vast majority are teenagers and not senior citizens.
Re:or if used properly (Score:4, Interesting)
According to the California Office of Traffic Safety, drivers aged 15-20 made up 6.3% of the population, but were involved in 12.5% of the injury and fatality collisions (http://www.ots.ca.gov/campaign/youthq/brief.asp)
Unlike some places, our insurance here varies only on driving record (licence goes up by $25 every bad thing you do, car never goes up) which is the way is should be.
Your mention of SK means, I presume, Saskatchewan, suggesting that Canada is your home. Canadian insurance laws seem quite different from American insurance laws. I'm anxious for next summer to come around so I reach the three-year point when the collision on my record -- my fault -- comes off. The settlement was for $10,000, and my rates got boosted by about $450 a year, meaning that they get $1350 for me costing them $10K, not to mention whatever other incidental costs are there. Of course, I've been paying my insurance company between $1200 and $2100 a year, depending on what I've been driving, whether I have a collision on my record, and my age group, so I guess it's fair. But I have no moving violations, and the two accidents have been relatively minor. I'm an odd exception to the rule.
My dad is even further off. He's been driving for 30 years, and has never had a moving violation or been in a single accident. He's come close, but never had one. Luck and skill. My middle brother, OTOH, is 25 and has four speeding tickets and three collisions, one of which resulted in the totaling of two relatively young cars cars and a six-month suspended license. I've seen his insurance bill, and it's not pretty. But it is simple statistics. Between the two extremes of my dad and his spotless record, and my brother, lies me. I see those, and I understand why the numbers on my insurance bill look as they do.
Canada has fewer people, generally a little more spread out than the United States, so the insurance laws and rates will be different. I know people who live in places where there's only a single paved road through town, and they pay less than half of what I do. They have lower chances of an accident. I drive the highways of Southern California, meaning I take risks whether it's my foot on the floor or not (usually not, but sometimes...). Part of living in the place I choose.
Dude... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dude... (Score:2)
Nerds and geeks (some of them anyway) have a well devloped sense of humor.
not quite (Score:5, Funny)
No. A teenager's worst nightmare would be a little black box that reports their "parking" *winkwink* habits, not driving.
Re:not quite (Score:4, Funny)
10:20:37: NOTHING TO REPORT.
10:25:46: NOTHING TO REPORT.
10:37:33: NOTHING TO REPORT.
10:49:23: NOTHING TO REPORT.
10:55:22: POLICE PRESENCE DETECTED. OFFICER LEAVES IN DISGUST AFTER WITNESSING DRIVER SITTING IN BACK EATING ICE CREAM SANDWICH ALONE.
11:05:29: NOTHING TO REPORT.
11:17:01: NOTHING TO REPORT.
Re:not quite (Score:4, Funny)
Put the important question is...... does it dispense condoms?
- HeXa
This WILL report parking (Score:2)
Re:not quite (Score:4, Insightful)
Any parent who gets one of these really needs to reevaluate their relationship with their kid, and their parenting techniques.
Paranoia (Score:4, Insightful)
Can we stop with the black-helicopters-are-watching-me-through-the-tel
Re:Paranoia (Score:2)
Penny-Arcade [penny-arcade.com]
Re:Paranoia (Score:2)
Fact: This particular "black box" device is being marketed to regular Joe's to let them track other people's usage.
Fact: Insurance companies are in it for the money - specifically, in it to pay out as little as possible to improve their shareholder's investments.
The paranoia is justified, IMO.
Re:Paranoia (Score:2)
It is not paranoia, because a) car rental agencies already use black boxes to track renters and b) insurance companies already "mandate" certain equipment through bump-and-discount pricing. Putting the two together is simply the logical conclusion.
Re:Paranoia (Score:2)
Sure - if you want to get in to name calling, its fairly easy to label anybody raising these concerns as a conspiracy-nut. But then, its also just as easy to label anybody refusing to look at the issue as sheep.
Address the issue.
The progression is clear for any tracking tech (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally, it's mandatory.
This is the time to oppose this stuff and set limits if there will ever be any at all.
Re:The progression is clear for any tracking tech (Score:2)
I've been racking my brain, but I just can't think of any examples of your progression. At least in the US. Can you help me out by naming at least one tracking technology to demonstrate the possibility of your thesis, and at least two to demonstrate its viability?
Wardriving (Score:3, Funny)
Well.. (Score:4, Troll)
[listening to silence]... Do I hear any outcries? No.
Americans will swallow this just like pervasive credit history control, mandatory live long ID numbers (hello, Soviet Union), "Under GOD!" daily pledges (fuck those atheists), Id check, face recognition, mandatory 10-day address registration for all non-citizens.. and list goes on and on..
Losers.
It is their vehicle... (Score:5, Insightful)
People who disagree can use public transportation. Hopefully, mass transit will get a much needed boost because of people who are unwilling to be tracked.
The US is built on car scale (Score:2)
This is most evident in places such as Atlanta, GA- the entire Gwinnett County area is one giant sprawl with no interconnection, so it's likely that anything you want to do is 5-10 miles away from you at any given point, with no public transit between here and there.
Re:It is their vehicle... (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree anyway.
I really have not seen a single post that validates objecting to having something like this in your car. In fact a lot of the arguments against it are really for it in my mind.
Someone said "It violates the 5th amendment- your own car can testify against you"
Ignoring how really wrong that statment is legally- the flipside is what I like about these systems. In the case of an accident we can have FACTS as opposed to conjecture.
Some have said this wont stop accidents or save lives. (I disagree but it doesn't matter.) That's not the point. The point is knowing what happened- so that blame is not put upon the wrong person.
What valid activity or freedom could be hindered by this? I would like to hear some rational scenarios where this kind of thing could limit your 'rights'.
.
Re:It is their vehicle... (Score:3, Funny)
So you were that jackass going 55 in the left lane the whole way back from Florida last week. Thanks a lot, idiot!
Anyway, I see any [non-far-left] lane as "go as slow as you want" and the left lane as "go faster than the car behind you but other than that as slow as you want."
You clearly see it as "Drive 55 miles per hour even though the speed limits in the U.S. are set, on average, 15% lower than the optimum safe speed for the road.
Re:It is their vehicle... (Score:3, Insightful)
Neither do I (to a certain degree), but I think a rider needs to be tacked onto that.
If you are going to charge a large penalty (over, say, $50) you should verbally and visually (as in a BIG RED SIGN IN ALL CAPS) warn the renter of just how much trouble they could be in.
I know you should read all of a contract, but in reality, we don't have time to read all of them, and we just assume that if a company has such an egregious policy that they'd let us know the "nice" way. (I mean, do you really want to be sued over your policy? Its just that much more airtight when you let the person know verbally as well as in the contract).
Not that new (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember seeing a "consumer report" on 20/20 (or a similar newsprogram) about this device being put in new cars without the knowledge of the buyers. It was also illegal to remove it.
Anyone have any better memory than I and can provide more detail?
Re:Not that new (Score:2)
What's the problem? (Score:4, Interesting)
Frankly I'd like to have one of these babies in my car. It would remove a lot of uncertainty around what caused an accident: ("As you can see Judge, I was indeed stopped and my brake lights were working when the idiot rear ended me")
Re:What's the problem? (Score:3, Flamebait)
If these boxes become mandatory, and they will, you will not be allowed to withhold the evidence anymore than you can keep the police from examining the rest of your vehicle.
Frankly I'd like to have one of these babies in my car. It would remove a lot of uncertainty around what caused an accident: ("As you can see Judge, I was indeed stopped and my brake lights were working when the idiot rear ended me")
If the device were reliable, that might be right. But you can't read the box yourself so you can never verify it, can you? In fact, you have no idea what the evil little thing is collecting or how accurate it is, do you? When you get a letter from your insurace company informing you that your risk category has been changed how will you be able to defend yourself? You can't, you will simply suck it up and pay.
Nice talking to you again, little rodent. You are always so wrong headed.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Legally, I have a hard time believing this, since the data on this is not "obvious" and "out in the open," in much the same way a cop can't go through your underware drawer even if he has a warrent to search your house for a stolen TV. Of course, IANAL and would like to actually hear someone with a legal background's thoughts.
IIf the device were reliable, that might be right. But you can't read the box yourself so you can never verify it, can you? In fact, you have no idea what the evil little thing is collecting or how accurate it is, do you? When you get a letter from your insurace company informing you that your risk category has been changed how will you be able to defend yourself? You can't, you will simply suck it up and pay.
Nor do I know *exactly* how most of the stuff I own works. All kinds of nasty stuff could be going on in my pinball machine (maybe Gottlieb is tracking my every multiball). Now, if something legal takes place that involves the black box then its accuracy is going to become central in a court case (remember Simpson and DNA). If its shown to be inaccurate then kiss it goodbye as evidence.
And just how is the insurance company going to raise my rates? Are they going to sneak into my garage each and every night and download the data? Uh, NO. The only way they see the blackbox is after an accident. But, since I'd just been in an accident they're already raising my rates, which is exactly the same thing to do right now. I would argue that it just may help keep your rates down (since there's more proof over who's at fault), but these are insureance companies afterall. That said, I still fail to see how this black box would change anything for the worse.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
You VOLUNTEER to pay a much higher insurance rate, or you VOLUNTEER to have the black box. It's that simple.
As for the mandatory car insurance laws, they use the same logic. Either you VOLUNTEER to get car insurance, or you VOLUNTEER to not drive.
I think they used the same logic in the Soviet Union. Either you VOLUNTEER to become a party member, or you VOLUNTEER to relocate to Siberia. . .
No, *Insurance* Owns Your Car (Score:4, Informative)
No you don't own the car - or rather, you won't in a moment.
Having been in a crash that totaled my vehicle (gotta love people who turn left in front of you without looking) I can tell you what happens:
After the police and reporting nonsense your vehicle (or parts remaining of) go to a garage or adjusters location to be assessed. Once assessed the insurance company will tell you how much they will give you for it.
Here's the catch: They are buying the car off you.
When you go to collect your $ you sign and turn over the ownership, giving the insurance company total ownership. They are now free to do what they will with it... including checking the "black box".
So if you're car is totaled you might want to pull the box if you can. Mind you, they might have a few questions for you about where it went.
Re:No, *Insurance* Owns Your Car (Score:2)
Well, while its still your property its still ok. Now, if they make it a condition of your insurance policy that you must also "sell" them the black box in order to recieve compensation (I'd wager they would) you have a point.
But....
I'm still having a hard time figuring out how the last 5 seconds of data is going to be of any use (ok, maybe actuarial data) to the insurance company above and beyond helping figure out the cause of the crash.
Re:No, *Insurance* Owns Your Car (Score:5, Funny)
Something like this:
Insurance Co: So Mr. Andersen, in the accident report it says you were going 55mph at the time of the accident.
You: yes, that's correct.
Insurance Co: Really? That's very interesting! You see, according to this little black box your car was doing 70mph.
You: uhhhhh
Insurance Co: You should be careful doing that, your car could race up behind you and hit you in the ass.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:2)
Paranoia is warranted, but Alaska has the solution (Score:2)
Seriously. People in Alaska get into accidents, and then they don't fix their car. Every other car on the road has a big dent in it.
Another solution (Score:2)
How to remove it? (Score:5, Funny)
Johnny pulls in the drive way after coming from a techno drug laden rave fest...
"Johnny, as your parents we're starting to become concerned about you..."
"W..What do you mean?"
"Well according to our black box, you've been spending 7 hours a night at the movies."
"Oh, uh.. right. Ya, uh.. I admit it, I'm a movie junkie."
Can't be a terribly complicated piece of gear... (Score:2)
I imagine it would be simple enough just to disable it when you feel like it, and make everyone wonder.
Re:How to remove it? (Score:3, Funny)
Step 1: Unscrew cover to expose circuit board.
Step 2: Pop hood.
Step 3: Retrieve jumper cables from trunk (you are in the Midwest, right?)
Step 4: Connect jumper cables to battery.
Step 5: Apply cables to circuit board.
Step 6: Return items to original position.
Step 7: Feign ignorance.
Easy 'nuff.
Re:How to remove it? (Score:2)
Huh? Are we going to jail every time an electronic system fails in our cars? What next? Death penalty for getting a BSOD?
hmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Airplanes and restrictions on data use (Score:2)
The system there is aimed at exactly what neksys said, reducing the chance of people dying in the future. The regulatory structure is aimed at encouraging people to cooperate with accident investigators by protecting them against getting sued or prosecuted for telling the truth to the NTSB.
To be comparable, the motor vehicle laws would have to make black boxes inadmissible in prosecutions and maybe even off-limits in lawsuits.
Anyone else notice the workaround, by the way? If I read correctly the data are in a circular buffer which is replaced every 250 engine starts. If the car's safe to start after a crash, an unscrupulous owner could clear the accident recording simply by turning the key on and off repeatedly.
Current case law (Score:2)
From this page, it seems that recorders like this are treated as any other sort of evidence. I don't see any that aren't related to a car accident in some way, though. The real test case would be one that involved tapping of the recorder data under another circumstance.
It seems obvious that the next step that's needed is to get some real regulations in this arena- NTSB investigation regulations could probably be easily extended to cover these devices.
Re:hmm.... (Score:2)
The boxes emit a loud noise when the driver does somnthing wrong. And it gets loder if they turn the radio up. so if your speeding it annoys the hell out of you so you slow down.
Also, it would be nice to use it to help my kids become better drivers. Yes it can help people become better drivers by letting them evaluate there habits.
Its NOT spying if they know its there. BTW, teens need to be spied on.
Re:hmm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know there are US operatives at home and abroad covertly seeking out terrorists. Are they not spying? And no, teens do not need to be spied on - they need to be instilled with a good set of values at an early age, then be allowed to make their own mistakes. Guided and watched, yes - much like how you taught them to ride their two-wheeler, but spied on, no. If you only spy on them, they'll never lose their training wheels - I hope you realize that, if you're a parent.
Re:hmm.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:hmm.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bullshit. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, you have a right to drive. However, if you'd like to drive on public streets and highways with the rest of us, that is very much a priveledge. A privledge earned through drivers training and testing. You play by the rules so that you don't get the rest of us killed. If you don't and your license is pulled, you need to look into alternative forms of transportation. Bike, walk, whatever. Not my problem. But you have no inalienable _right_ to drive. You have a right not to be discriminated against in the assignment of this privledge, but of you're pulling DUIs or too many speeding tickets, or can't see sufficiently well to pass the driving test - No license for you.
Not ALL teens are morons! (Score:2)
Let's not waste resources, most teens will learn to drive very well with the available training, but a few exceptions, who cause most of the accidents, need a bit more attention. "Black boxes" monitoring driving habits would help identify those cases where extra training would be most needed.
FYI: She Was In Her 40's (Score:2)
Nice teen rant. To bad the woman who totaled my van was in her 40's.
I would've liked to have the data myself: throw it back at the cop who tossed me in the back of her cruiser for 2hrs claiming I was "DUI" when in fact I had 0 BAL and she was at fault (turned left in front of me while I had a green). The fact that people on the scene backed up my story didn't seem to matter.
You see, if you are male and twentysomething you are automatically at fault for anything.
Remember, cops are never predujical...
Re:FYI: She Was In Her 40's (Score:2)
That has to be one of my more creative typo's. Lets try that again,
Cops are never prejudicial...
Much better. Oh, and when I said it was "her fault" I meant the other driver and not the cop. Thank insert-deity-here I didn't hit her!
Re:hmm.... (Score:2)
Why? Because Germany has a good public transit system [att.net], and frankly the US public transit system outside (and inside some) large urban areas is virtually non-existant. Thus automobiles have become the default/only "public" transport outside of large cities in the US making being unable to use a car a much harsher punishment.
That isn't to say there isn't a need to remove habitually dangerous drivers from the road. Just that the punishment of permanent license revokation is a much harsher punishment here than in Germany, perhaps resulting in more leinency in the sentancing in the US.
One way to alleviate this would be to upgrade the public transportation systems in the US, but that would be quite expensive, and I don't see it happening any time soon.
Not such a great idea (Score:3, Insightful)
In the real world, nobody ever drives the speed limit under good driving conditions. Realistic freeway speeds are at least 80 in nondeveloped areas, and cars going under that speed are actually at increased risk.
Besides, nothing like this will ever stop the experimentation kids do in cars. In my younger days, I did donuts in the empty church parking lot, caught air on the Spooner St. bridge, drove my car over a lawn or two, etc. No excessive speed involved (you'd jump Spooner doing 35).
IMO, your best bet is to buy your kid a fairly modern, safe car without too much extra juice (try a Toyota with side-curtain airbags with traction control and ABS, or a Volvo if it's in your means) -- buying kids old cars is actually more dangerous due to the lack of modern safety gear. Those parents buying their kids Z3's... well, that's just natural selection at work.
Base lesson: No good ever came of spying on your kids and making it clear you don't have any trust for them.
Re:Not such a great idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not such a great idea (Score:2)
The best solution is probably the one my parents used: figure out how much I make an hour, then subsidize a decent-but-not-insane used car to a price where it represented a *lot* of work. I got a used Buick LaSabre for $1000, which was about 150 hours of grunt work at a local pharmacy for me, and my parents covered the rest.
Re:Not such a great idea (Score:2)
Re:Not such a great idea (Score:2)
lawyer: "well sir, at the time you rear-ended my client, your foot was all the way down on the accellerator, the steering wheel was straight ahead, your music volumn was on 27 (a sample to the jury shows how loud it is)... how can you explain this?"
you: "traffic conditions"
i don't think so.
Re:Not such a great idea (Score:2)
In the real world, I wave my gun around. People who walk in front of me are actually at increased risk.
I'd like to say that cars kill more Americans each year than the entire Vietnam war. I'd also like to say that cars kill more Amercians each year than handguns do, but I can't. Drivers do it.
People like you think that the left lane is for speeders. It's not. Tickets are for speeders because speeding is dangerous. People like you make people like me hate automobiles. People like you make me think that black boxes with certian publicly verifiable specifications should be mandatory.
This would be excellent for insurance co's to .... (Score:3, Insightful)
More importantly, this might save someone's life!
I'm sure people living in states like New York or New Jersey (where I hear the cost of car insurance is very high) would not mind anything that lowers their rates. So should I pay thousands of dollars on insurance, or let my insurance company install a box that gets my rates reduced by a few hundred, maybe even a thousand? You make the call...
Re:This would be excellent for insurance co's to . (Score:2)
Oops, you sped, that will be anther 50 bucks this month.
Forget that you where passing, or trying to get out of the way of another vehical.
thats NOT what there doing, but mandatory instalation would be wrong.
Sounds good to me (Score:2)
I won't mention that its also very tempting and easy to hook up a PDA to a small transmitter and emulation tranducers to fool these little black boxes into making them think you only drive your car down your driveway at 5mph in one direction for a few hours a day and they will never think you do anything bad.
this is a good thing (Score:3, Insightful)
As a parent, I will put this in the car my children will drive when they are lod enough. Not as a way to punish them, but as a way to instill better driving habits.
monitoring your childrem, and the government monitoring, or forcing some to monitor, individuals are two wildly different things.
I was fortunate, my father sent me to a top notch driving school where I learned how to control a vehical in a great many situations. those class's saved my life more often the knowing what the punishment is for drunk driving.
Re:this is a good thing (Score:2)
Re:this is a good thing (Score:2)
Even with formal training teenagers still aren't in control of there emotions. I just think it would be nice to point out areas that raise red flags in a teens driving habits.
The whole driver liscense method need to be thought out again.
but thats another topic.
There are these things called odometers... (Score:3, Insightful)
Both good and bad (Score:4, Insightful)
I used to commute on CA-17, which connects Silicon Valley with Santa Cruz. It's always full of people who think nothing of driving 80 mph on a windy mountain road, who think anybody who observes the speed limit is doing it just to piss them off, and who basically exhibit behavior that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere except on the highway.
And that's what it's all about, isn't it? Communication. One reason people love their cars is that it's the one place they don't have to listen to anybody. Unfortunately, lots of people abuse this solitude. If you behaved, say, in a line at McDonalds the same way people behave on Highway 17, people would communicate a lot of anger to you. (That kind of communication while driving is known as "road rage".) Attempts have been made to communicate to the over-assertive driver. With results even -- whenever the CHP ups its presence on 17 the death rate goes way down. But the concept communicated is not "speed kills" but rather "be a good little boy when daddy's watching."
If some people end up getting supervised because they think good behavior is just a game, they've only themselves to blame.
Re:Both good and bad (Score:2)
Incompetant behavior is what kills on the road, not speed.
Re:Both good and bad (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with communication. And everything to do with Social Dominance. The Human Animal excercises his or her Social Dominance on the highway, because, in a car, they are empowered as they would not be if they were more equalized, standing on a sidewalk, in a crowd. In a crowd, anyone can punch you in the nose if you step on their toes or cut in line. On the road, if you have a faster more nimble car, you can get in front of people, which is the symbolic act of dominance.
It's human nature. Attempts to control these people through heavy-handed legislation and spying devices is going to simply make them desire MORE rebellious behavior - people who lack control in one area of their lives, and crave control, typically will find another area to control to satisfy that craving.
That's why I say, VIDEO GAMES are the answer!
How much does this really help? (Score:2, Insightful)
For example, even with this device installed I could be driving down the street (at the speed limit) talking on my cell phone, smoking a cigarette, drinking a beer through a straw, having sex with my girlfriend and tailgating the car in front of me
...or charge different rates based on habits (Score:2)
Or, you frequently visit a friend just over the Mississippi border, a state that doesn't require auto insurance. Each time you do that, $bing.
I'm sure there are plenty of other (and better) paranoid posts.
This is a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Fortunately, a person who saw this happen hanged around until the police came and was able to refute the other driver's fabrication.
If the car had a black box, the police officer could have quickly determined that my friend's mother's car was stationary up till the moment of impact regardless of whether a nice person did or did not loiter around at the crash scene.
Granted, people might complain about details such as the car's location and a log of speeds. These issues can be solved by convincing law makers to dictate a standard set of statistics said auto boxes would record.
interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
When I have kids (God permitting), I may consider putting the webcam on the baby's crib. It would be fun, other people would like it, it would be a good way to keep an eye on the baby when nobody is with him/her for whatever reason, and it would hurt nobody.
Once that kid starts moving around, and growing up into a person, I would *NEVER* subject my children to that kind of oversight. I can imagine it would be VERY detrimental to their social life. Children need to live lives seperate from their parents. God knows there are things I've done (and still do) that my parents don't need to know. I'm sure my kids will do the same, and I don't want know about it (as long as they aren't hurting themselves or others).
You *NEED* some privacy in your life. I will NEVER vote for somebody who supports making something like this mandatory (and I hope my stubborn side will continue to keep this true, even as I grow old and raise kids of my own).
Bryan
Useful for accidents, not that great otherwise (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not useful to know everything the driver normally does without having the road conditions in extensive detail. There's no way the box is going to be able to tell what a safe speed is, whether someone is driving erraticly in response to other cars and pedestrians. Someone driving slowly could be driving in fog, following a bicycle, in traffic, reading signs and ignoring the road, or just stoned.
This data is only really useful in conjunction with scene evidence and other witnesses (except that you could easily tell where the kid took the car and when). You can't really use it to measure driving skill.
Nag-A-Tron (Score:2)
Work around (Score:2, Funny)
They've already had a trial of these (Score:5, Funny)
Usually people said, "Oh shit!" some, occasionally you'd hear snoring, but they did find a disturbing trend.
On large 4x4's in the deep south, the last thing said was "Ya'll hold my beer and watch this."
Similar Product, different MO (Score:3, Informative)
It monitors speed (how fast they were driing), seat belt status (if they had the seat belts buckled), how many people were in the car (pressure-sensitive switches in the seats), and can be configured remotely by the parents--I don't have kids myself (only 22), but it's a great 'rule enforcer' for kids who have broken their parents trust when it comes to driving, but situations (e.g., school, work, etc) prevent the parent from totally acting the 'take the keys away and lock the doors' approach for punishment.
We have some companies who use these in their fleet vehicles or secondary finance market vehicles so they can look online and see where their cars are, prevent the cars from starting, see how many people have been riding with the driver, and send/receive text messages to/from the driver.
We market the product as informational use only, but people are using it in a Big Brother kind of sense. That bugs me--but that's another story for another day.
old news (Score:2)
IEEE is creating a standard (Score:3, Informative)
"Eleven of the 45 companies that build passenger cars worldwide already use some kind of black-box technology, according to representatives of the IEEE. The best-known of those is General Motors Corp., which said three years ago that it includes the device, known as a sensing and diagnostics module, as part of its airbag sensing systems on most GM vehicles. The module can store such information as engine speed, vehicle speed, airbag deployment, seat belt deployment and the state of the brakes before and during an accident. "
Cars already have black boxes (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not 100% sure about why these weren't put into widespread use, but I believe the necessary laws have not been passed, so law enforcement is unable to use the data. Not all vehicles have been equipped.
Thank god the insurance companies didn't use these (Score:4, Interesting)
*This is a tale of dot com glutony*
I was working for a small startup with a good amount of capitol. I was averaging a trip a week down to our LA office to deal with all the windows problems. (Remote wasn't possible, the CTO thought that running HIZ software through a firewall/Router/Tunnel would make it run bad)
Anyways aside from the problem of having a lunatic for a CTO my main issue was making sure that if the LA office needed me that week that they arranged all travel.
Well sometimes things were forgotten, and one week they forgot to rent my car for me. I was in the burbank airport, at the budget rent a car counter...
"Mr. Toqer we're sorry but we have no reservations for you!"
"Awe fuck, they slipped upped again" I muttered to myself. "Ok then what do you have left??
"We have a 1998 Convertable Jaguar XK8!" Oooh my pulse quickened, I was going to be there 3 days, sportin that ride in LA would be tits! So I called my CEO to see if it would be ok.
"Yo, CEO, your office manager forgot to reserve my car AGAIN! All the other rental places are out of cars and all thats left is a Jaguar Xk8"
"How much?"
"$350@day"
"Do it! I want to see you here in 30 minutes!"
Man, what a rush. I had never, and I mean NEVER EVER driven a car that fast in my life. I hopped on the 405?? and headed towards Thousand Oaks. I put the pedal to the medal and I felt like I was the millenium falcon going into hyperdrive! It went from 0 to 110 in no time flat.
Well towards the end of my trip I thought i'd go see the sunset strip by myself. I wanted to see the viper room where river phonix died (favorite actor, stand by me, ect) I made it a point to have a beer at about 9 of the joints on the strip. Fully loaded with a buzz I hopped back on the 101 to thousand oaks.
I look back now, it's not that funny. I really could have hurt myself, or some innocent bystander. 25, young dumb and full of cum.
Well, not really an exciting end to this post, just that I somehow managed to make it back to my hotel without wrecking or getting pulled over. Next day I handed the keys back and swore I would never drive anything over a "econo class" again. I'm not sure I can responsibilly handle that much power.
PUNCH IT CHEWIE
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAE
--toq
Teen Driving habit facts (Score:5, Insightful)
Their parents. If a child grows up watching daddy tailgate that little Kia in his big-bad yukon while trash talking, "Man this asshole is doing the speed-limit.. I wish I could just push him out of the way" or watches mommie floor it up to the barrels and arrow-board in a construction area and FORCES her way in to the merged traffic at the last second..
This is how these teens that drive like idiots and morons get their driving habits... from the idiots and morons that had and raised them.
And being a regular commuter..The numbers of drivers that drive like idiots and morons is increasing..
I dont think the parents should be black-boxing the kids... it should be the state, and pull their drivers license until 25 if the box reports idiot driving.... But then I also believe that the driving test/license requirements should be quadrupled, as with giving 50% of the traffic fines to the officer as an incentive to enforce traffic laws.
too many people are content with driving like morons, and they are breeding more morons for the roads.
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
This doesnt teach them driving (Score:3, Insightful)
This little device doesnt teach them proper driving. I mean since when has coming to a complete stop at every stop sign made someone a better driver? Never, its the concious, logical thought that goes into driving. A good driver does not neccisarily follow the rules. "Obey the law but dont let it rule you." What does it matter if I come to a complete stop at every stop sign if no one is there? They need to learn how to use their brain! Not become little socially controlled automatons who learn to obey the "black box" without thinking. This program isnt making good drivers, its making nice little tax paying, go exactly the speed limit, good citizen sheep that vote the way N'Sync tells them to.
When i was young, my mother never went through my drawers looking for pot, spying on my habits to protect me from myself. She would never resort to installing filters on our computer to make sure i wasnt looking at how to make bombs. Invading your childs privacy and forcing them to act like there is a camera over their shoulder is not the way to make sure they dont hurt themselves. What people do in front of a camera is different from what they do in private. Fear of consequences is not a substitute for morals. This "black box" is just another way for parents to invade their childrens privacy.
This is just another step towards Hilary Clintons "It takes a Village" perfect world for raising children.
{/rant}
A quick fix. (Score:3, Funny)
"Hey son, I went to check on your driving last night and that damn box didn't work! Can you explain?"
"Yeah, I accidentally poured my beer into it while driving. Sorry about that. Guess they won't replace that under warranty."
Repeat until parent is broke. Or you have to get your own car.
Re:Big Brother gets a step closer (Score:2, Insightful)
This has NOTHING to do with the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, nor does it have anything to do with the Articles of Confederation or Decleration of Independance.
You might be disillustioned, but try to keep this in context.
It's about technology working for the insurance companies and the police, not about civil rights.
Re:Big Brother gets a step closer (Score:2)
Oh, but then I guess you'll insist that I won't have anything to worry about as long as I don't break the law. Take your head out of the sand, son. In recent months it's been considered unpatriotic to question government intrusion into our lives. Did you miss the latest plan: Operation TIPS? Go have a look at the ACLU website for a nice picture of the rise of facism in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Re:rediculous (Score:2, Flamebait)
What a pitiful little groundless stab at government, whom, might I add, DONT want this in every car. It's the private enterprise that would like it in every car. Total market saturation == most successful business.
Re:rediculous (Score:2)
Now for the obligatory...Imagine a beowulf cluster of these...and Does it run Linux, or how soon till we've ported it over.
Will a virus cause your car to report you driving at 900 mph and ensure that hackers will 0wn your driving record ?
La-dee da...okie I am bored and going home now...be well all
Re:Wow, what a horrible idea... (Score:2)
Re:Wow, what a horrible idea... (Score:2)
That's not fair. Assuming he's going to college, he shouldn't be criticized too harshly for having his folks help him out with auto or housing or whatever -- it's fuggin' expensive, esp. if you end up doing a work-study sort of thing.
Re:Wow, what a horrible idea... (Score:2)
That said, having a little electronic mommy watching you is a terrible idea -- you never get any sense of responsibility about what you're doing when you're not the one in charge.
Personally, were I 16 again, I'd get laid more^H^H^H^H... I mean, were I 16 again, this thing would be in for a short circuit -- a little extra current applied to the board is just what the doctor ordered.
"I dunno, mom. Maybe the whole line of these things are defective?"
Re:A Dichotomy... (Score:2)
Quoting rather loosely: "And the United States? They believe that by counting the snouts of the wise and the ignorant alike, they can somehow arive at a wise decision." -- Straha, Shiplord
Re:blah blah blah! (Score:2)
Seems to me that company XYZ will be having control over something your parents own.
I have seen some real jackass teen drivers. It always struck me that if their parents could see how they were driving the car that they borrowed, that they would be allowed to borrow it for another year (or even better, they wouldn't drive like that in the first place).
Parents have every right to monitor how their children are driving their cars.
Re:blah blah blah! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fucking motorcycles (Score:2, Informative)
There is one small exception. Both vehicals must be able to fit in the lane. A motorbike can do this easily. However if they are forced to change lanes (to avoid angry motorists like you), they must signal. Thats about all that applies. Also, beware it is a felony to open your car door to impeed a passing motorbike. I believe manslaughter, or at least attempted pending outcome.
And no, I don't ride a bike. My father was a cop.