NTSB Recommends Black Boxes For All Cars 612
linuxwrangler writes "Officials at the National Transportation Safety Board are recommending the government require data recorders in all passenger vehicles. David Sobel of EPIC says his group has privacy concerns - especially when drivers are unaware of the presence of the devices. Auto black-boxes have been covered here before."
Re:All NEW cars (Score:4, Informative)
I think a lot of people aren't aware of the extent that this happens already. In most newer cars, if there is a major accident (most likely determined by damage to a specific crumple-zone or airbag deployment, though I'm not quite sure) the spedometer will simply stop, pegged at the speed of impact. While this is certainly not infalable, and of course the car could have been accelerating, breaking, or any number of other factors could have been in play at the moment of impact, it is designed primarily to help investigators determine cause and fault in an accident.
can those join in Beowulf clusters? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:why not? (Score:1, Informative)
You don't have to break any laws and you can still end up in prison. That's because mistakes happen...in fact, injustice happens.
You might want to look up the word "freedom"...live by that creed.
Re:How is this a bad thing? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Good (Score:3, Informative)
Auto-driving systems need good measurements of what's happening right now, but they don't exactly depend on the black box because they don't particularly care about what's happened in the past... they only need data on what the present state is and what future actions have been announced by others.
Black boxes, by definition, record what has happened over a given interval and keep that data on non-volitile memory so that the infomation can survive a crash.
In short, one system wants to keep track of where we've been, the other only needs it to determine where we're going. Both systems might need the same data measurement devices, but that's all they'll have in common.
Our rights online (Score:5, Informative)
Re:All NEW cars (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Given the people I share the road with... (Score:3, Informative)
Then it'll only be confirming what the investigators already know from the tire marks left on the road.
Don't get me wrong - I've nothing against black boxes in cars, with the usual provisos about only recording relevant information, only being available in the event of a crash, etc. Your example is nothing that conventional methods don't already have covered, though.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Discussion never going to be settled (Score:1, Informative)
You know there is Two pedals down there.
what is wrong with the breaks?
Re:Good (Score:0, Informative)
Re:5th Amendment Rights (Score:2, Informative)
Re:All NEW cars (Score:5, Informative)
From what I've heard on previous discussions on slashdot and elsewhere, these things as a general rule only record a continuous 15-second queue of material - storing 100,000 miles worth of one second data plots covering speed, breaking force, steering direction, etc would be fairly difficult without more extensive equipment and storage, not to mention largely unproductive. The black boxes are only interested in what happened the last 15 seconds before the crash, which is useful information.
//tinfoil hat off
~Will
Re:You need better drivers and drivers education (Score:4, Informative)
Long ago when I took my drivers' education course at the high-school, my other classmates didn't care about learning the rules. They thought they already knew enough, because they know how to press on the pedals...
It didn't help that one of the worst drivers in the class missed 7/15 of the multiple choice questions that it takes to get a license to drive in Texas, yet the grader working for the Department of Public Safety said, "Well, we will just pass you anyway."
I think that in the United States we need a very rigorous written AND on-street test and that drivers should be retested yearly.
I think that the laws in place ought to be enforced ALL THE TIME. If the speed limit is X, then you had better not drive over X MPH, even if you think it's a stupidly low limit. The solution to "bad laws" isn't to break them, but to get them changed (granted, this doesn't happen as quickly as just breaking the law.)
I think that routine traffic laws can be enforced by automatic device. I do not think that this violates anyone's privacy rights. I think that a person's right to privacy is severely diminished when a person is in a public place (like streets...) Privacy laws are intended to ensure that what you do in private stays there, not to make sure that you can break the law if you don't get caught. The law is the law and if you break it, why does it have to be in front of a police officer to have any weight?
I do note that I do not have a solution to the problem of ensuring that automatic enforcement is accurate and unabused. I am sure that it is possible, but I am also aware that some police districts in the U.S. are corrupt. That still does not give anyone permission to break the laws that are in place.
GM and Ford already make the data available. (Score:4, Informative)
Does anyone know if any of the other large manufacturers (e.g., BMW, Toyota, Honda) do this? Is there a list somewhere?
Here is a link [sfgate.com]to see how the data is being used from GM and Ford vehicles.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
I have many reasons to hate insurance companies: how they handle claims, all the little exclusions, getting billing and coverage correct, etc. Jacking rates to irresponsible drivers is not one of them. With the exception of getting rear-ended while sitting at a red light TWICE by idiots talking on their cell phones, and a deer that ran into my rear passenger door (in the middle of a city no less) I haven't had an accident or ticket in over 20 years. My rates are actually quite reasonable.
Back to the subject at hand, I'm on the fence on the black box issue. On one hand, It's a privacy violation. On the other hand, it's a great tool to identify liars (one of the idiots that rear-ended me tried to claim that I was backing up. Needless to say, the cops didn't believe her when looking at the skid marks.) When concrete evidence is lacking (skid marks in my case) the black boxes can help identify what really happened (especially when one or more of the people involved is dead.)
Remember: these boxes only store a brief period of time; 30 seconds or so - not your entire driving history.
Re:GM and Ford already make the data available. (Score:2, Informative)
For $4000 you can get a Tech3 reader and read any GM vehicles computer.
And if your THAT worried after a wreck, the computer/black box is located behind the center console area of GM vehicles.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:5, Informative)
-John
Re:All NEW cars (Score:2, Informative)
On the tax front the most obvious example of government abusing its power is payroll taxes. In America working people are obligated to pay relatively steep social security taxes out of our wages. This would be all well and good if we had assurance our money was going in to a "lock box" that would be there for retirement with some reasonable interest. Unfortunately it doesn't. The rather hefty social security surplus is instead being spent to defray a rather huge budget deficit, much of it created by recent hefty tax cuts for the wealthy and increasingly out of control spending. Social security has become a regressive tax, it impacts the least affluent the hardest and is being used to help reduce the tax burden on the wealthy. There is great potential the system will be bankrupt by the time many of us reach retirement unless they jack up the social security taxes again like they did in the early 80's which is where the current surplus comes from. It is a simple example of government abusing ordinary people and they are largely powerless to stop it since the Democrats and Republican's have both abused it in different ways.
Another example of government abusing the will of the people is when political appointees take action that is contrary to the best interests of the people and are only occasionally reigned in by Congress. The actions of the FCC and Michael Powell to allow further concentration of power in the hand of a few huge media monopolies is a great example. It is very detrimental to the people in that they lose diversity in opinion and information but ordinary people are increasingly powerless to stop it. It is very beneficial to Viacom, Disney, Clear Channel and Rupert Murdoch, who have the wealth and lobbying power to get their way while ordinary people don't, except through increasingly meaningless elections.
Now lets move to black boxes in cars. I certainly have no problem if the ONLY thing they are used for is to collect data for an accident investigation. Unfortunately it is a slippery slope, and watch that first step. Step #2 and #3 are the killers. They put in a GPS system to improve the quality of the data and #3 they put in a satellite up and down link like OnStar to provide better "service". At that point, not only don't you own the roads, you don't own your car. Someone can remotely lock and unlock your car, kill the engine or track your every movement.
As long as you assume your government is benevolent, and they or you never do anything wrong, maybe you don't care. But many people in the world live in places where the government isn't benevolent, increasingly the U.S. among them. Having gone this far down the slippery slope what is to say the government wont start using this technology to track political dissidents and opponents. For example Tom Delay abused the current Homeland security system to try to track down Texas legislators who fled Texas to try to stop an essentially illegal gerrymandering of Texas congressional districts by the Republicans to insure their control of the House. With black boxes in every car Delay could have had an instant locating service so the Texas rangers could have had an extra edge in tracking them down and rounding them up to force them to vote.
Another example, perhaps these could be used by a party in power to track the movements of their opposition in a fishing expedition to catch them in compromising situations, at a hotel with a mistress for example.
Or perhaps the government could start tracking the cars of of known protest leaders so they would have advanced warning of meetings to organize protests or people on the way to protests so the government could take preemptive action, arrest them for speeding, or put up ro
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
Sections 22349 and 22456 have to do with highway speeds and the maximums allowed (55, 60, 65, or 70, depending on surveys), and 22351 has to do both with driving on a highway at less than posted speeds and with enforcing and challenging prima facie speed limits on streets and alleys.
Summary: Black on white is the law. (However, black on yellow is a dare.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
Maximum speed limit signs will be either be 55mph-70mph signs. You exceed this speed by 1mph, and you can receive a citation. Basic speed law #22350 does not apply.
However, regarding a speed limit sign, these limits are set based on some set of traffic surveys and street conditions (I'm not sure of exactly how they get to this number). This is a case where the speed limit is a recommended maximum speed, but quite frequently it can be safe to exceed that speed, for example, light traffic, clear weather, etc. Unfortunately, because traffic citations, especially speeding violations are used primarily for revenue, not safety, it is not easy to fight these tickets in court.
Most people opt to take traffic school where you can avoid getting any permanent points on your record to avoid having insurance go up and pay the fine, rather than deal the hassle of going to court and getting off if you are lucky and catch the judge on a good day.
Additionally, not many people know that it can be legal to exceed the speed limit and don't know the basic speed law, so just pay the fine and move on.
I know that in Carlsbad, CA, there are a number of streets where police love to hide with their radar guns. These streets are streets where it is very easy to exceed the speed limit by 10 or more mph.
One street is a divided 2 lane road. On one side, you do get a lot of foot traffic and slow moving cars (right on the beach), so the 35mph speed limit makes sense. However, on the other side the speed limit is the same. But there is no parking on that side, and hardly ever any foot traffic because of that. There is nothing on that side of the street, just an open lagoon and power plant. But the same speed limit of 35mph exists, where a 40-45mph speed limit would probably be more appropriate. Police (often 5-6 of them on motor cycles) will hide behind some palm trees near the end of this road with their radar out, catching all the people cruising at 45mph and issuing citations. You will see 3-5 people pulled over at a time! I wonder how many of these people fight these tickets, and how many manage to win, but it certainly seems like an unfair situation.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
Not true. For a long time California had two drunk driving statutes that were virtually identical except one was "on a highway" and the other was anywhere else. (Note: "highway" in legal terms means essentially any public street, road, etc.) I believe there was a similar split for reckless.
They have updated the laws since I last looked at them back when I worked for the PD on campus. Now it reads "23152. (a) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle."
It doesn't say "on a highway", it says it is illegal to drive drunk. Period.
You may argue that such a law is unjust but it is the law.
Re:All NEW cars (Score:3, Informative)
You should get out of this irrational "State ownership" crap. Try leaning towards the reality embodied in the term "the State holds the roads in trust for all people".