Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Privacy Transportation Your Rights Online

Expect Mandatory 'Big Brother' Black Boxes In All New Cars From 2015 628

Posted by timothy
from the manufacturers-salivating dept.
New submitter Kraftwerk writes "A bill already passed by the Senate and set to be rubber stamped by the House would make it mandatory for all new cars in the United States to be fitted with black box data recorders from 2015 onwards. Section 31406 of Senate Bill 1813 (known as MAP-21), calls for 'Mandatory Event Data Recorders' to be installed in all new automobiles and legislates for civil penalties to be imposed against individuals for failing to do so. 'Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to require, beginning with model year 2015, that new passenger motor vehicles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder that meets the requirements under that part,' states the bill."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Expect Mandatory 'Big Brother' Black Boxes In All New Cars From 2015

Comments Filter:
  • The next step? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fragfoo (2018548) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:05PM (#39737201)

    And in all new persons from 2016.

    (Maybe old ones too)

  • Just a recorder... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:07PM (#39737215)

    If they are indeed just local data recorders, I don't really see a problem, as they could be used to make insurance arguments a lot less painful.

    It's only really a privacy concern for the overly paranoid if they are data-transmission-enabled.

  • slippery slope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bigtrike (904535) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:09PM (#39737237)

    The next thing you know, the government will be totally involved in your private lives, such as making decisions about who you can marry and restricting your ability to make decisions about your own body.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:11PM (#39737273)
    It's a good thing we know from experience that our government only collects data it's legally authorized to collect.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:14PM (#39737309)

    What? You think that an insurance company wouldn't try to get out of paying a claim if they could find out whether you were speeding? Information is enabling. People should think long and hard about what they want to enable others (especially the government and corporations) to do with their information.

  • Re:slippery slope (Score:4, Insightful)

    by yurtinus (1590157) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:14PM (#39737327)
    This made me giggle, then it made me weep. I'm posting because there is no +1: Uncomfortable Truth mod....
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:17PM (#39737395)

    Thinking long and hard is... oh, hey! The football game is on! Grab a beer and have a seat!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:18PM (#39737415)

    That's kind of the point. If a driver is speeding, his insurance should not cover any accidents that occurred while speeding.

    Likewise, if he is not speeding, and the insurance company insists that he must have been, recorders like this could be used to prove that the driver was not at fault, and insurance is still good.

  • by TheSpoom (715771) <slashdot@@@uberm00...net> on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:20PM (#39737449) Homepage Journal

    If the primary source for a link is InfoWars, look for a secondary link from a less biased and/or batshit insane source. If one cannot be found, skip the article please.

  • by spidercoz (947220) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:21PM (#39737463) Journal
    remember when the Republicans used to be all about civil liberties and keeping the government from crawling up your ass?
  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by berashith (222128) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:27PM (#39737535)

    all good until you hit a TSA minded check point that says you must turn over access to the data or you are not allowed to continue driving. You will not be allowed to turn around, you will have to leave the car in their possession. If anything on the recorder indicates that you have been exceeding speed limits , then thse will be ticketable offenses.

    The track record is too severe to trust our govt with this idea.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekoid (135745) <`moc.oohay' `ta' `dnaltropnidad'> on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:33PM (#39737615) Homepage Journal

    It is when you are in an accident,.

    Don't like it? then only drive on your own property.

    "And how hard is it to get a warrant?"
    ah, now you are focused on the correct thing.

    Look, everything you do outside of your home is being collected.
    There area lot of advantages to that. The fight shouldn't be not to do it. No one will go with that because the advantages are fer too great to people.
    Fight what the police and corporations can do with it. That's the problem.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:39PM (#39737723)

    It is a big deal, because it's NONE OF THEIR FUCKING BUSINESS.

    The use of a motor vehicle is a privilege, not a right, and it can be rescinded at any time by the state you live in. Because of so-called motor-vehicle compact laws, you will probably not get another license in any other state. Anything that happens on public roads is their business. If you have a problem with that, you can pay to build private roads and pay for the maintenance of those roads with tolls. Or... you can enjoy free and total access to all public roads, provided you're willing to deal with the fact that they can, are, and will track you. There's no difference between a black box and a camera at every point along the road.

    Be more afraid of what insurance companies will start doing in 30 years when there's a black box in every vehicle. "Well, you can pay $10 a month if you get our 'all your black box are belong to us' plan, or $1,000 a month for our 'standard' plan. Oh, by the way, carrying insurance is mandatory in your state. Well, what's it going to be, Citizen?

  • by dadioflex (854298) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:41PM (#39737741)

    remember when the Republicans used to be all about civil liberties and keeping the government from crawling up your ass?

    If that was the case, then why have laws at all? I don't understand how anybody can feel aggrieved that they're not being allowed to break the law. Don't get me wrong, if you want to speed or act like a dick in traffic, go right ahead - but whining that somebody is gonna try and catch you out isn't exactly the outlaw way. Oh, what's that you say Sundance? The sheriff is watching the bank? That's an outrageous invasion of my privacy. Hold my gun while I write my congressman...

  • by mooingyak (720677) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:42PM (#39737753)

    Points, condenser, coil. That's it. Also my radio is a tube radio so likely somewhat resistant to EMP. I only drive vehicles '60s or older.

    Who would have guessed that the survivors of the apocalypse would be .... grandpa?

    Nah, that's just whose car you'll need to steal.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:45PM (#39737809)

    It is a big deal, because it's NONE OF THEIR FUCKING BUSINESS.

    Of course, you are operating that vehicle on a public roadway, so how it's operated *is* their fucking business, especially if you break the law, harm someone else or their property.

  • by Desler (1608317) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:47PM (#39737831)

    No, they CLAIMED to be like that. There's a big difference between the two. They were plenty fond Of getting the government involved in people's sex lives, their reproductive health choices, whether or not they used drugs, using the government to mandate school prayer on people, etc. Let us also not forget that it was under Reagan that the country went from being the world's largest creditor to the world's larget debtor (before you try to claim the whole republicans are fiscal conservatives nonsense).

  • by jamstar7 (694492) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:50PM (#39737881)

    If they are indeed just local data recorders, I don't really see a problem, as they could be used to make insurance arguments a lot less painful.

    As if insurance companies are going to lower your premiums. What they'll do with this data is, increase premiums on those they now know are 'unsafe'. As in, you actually drive your car instead of keeping it safely in the garage. Or drive through 'unsafe' neighborhoods because it's the only fast way to work. Or drive 'too much', because statistics say an accident is inevitable, and the more you drive, the more likely you are to have an accident. Or, on Jan 1, you acellerated 10 miles an hour over the speed limit and did some sharp turns, no matter that you were manuevering to get out of an accident.

    It's only really a privacy concern for the overly paranoid if they are data-transmission-enabled.

    or, you know, if a cop can pull a quick download off it at a routine traffic stop or 'manditory spot inspection' with or without a warrant. Or probable cause. Or because he's bored and his sergeant is hassling him to get that ticket book filled out so that the city can make up the revenue shortfall from lost taxes as people move out of the area searching for jobs. Ignore the 5th Ammendment aspects of that black box for a moment and think it through. Those black boxes are meant to be used, and not necessarily in your favor. You really think they won't be downloaded and analysed at any excuse? You really think there won't be rulings that they somehow magically don't violate your 5th Ammendment rights? Maybe you're insufficiently paranoid.

  • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:55PM (#39737923)

    Many people don't have car insurance.
    - people who walk
    - people who ride a horse (my Amish neighbors)
    - people who use a buggy (local farmers)
    - people who ride a bike
    - or train
    - or bus
    - or cycle

    FURTHERMORE and this is the most important part: The Member States have the power to mandate insurance, but the central Congress does not. Read amendment 10 of our bill of rights.

    So if Massachusetts wants to mandate the purchase of hospital insurance, they can. I think that's anti-freedom idea but, per the 10th, they have the authority. The central government does not.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lgw (121541) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:58PM (#39737961) Journal

    Right, our government would never buy all your data from Onstar's Chinese affiliate to work around legal limts. Just like they'd never trade information with a foregn government who spies on American citizens in ways they're forbdden to. Yeah, nothing to see here, move along.

  • Re:slippery slope (Score:2, Insightful)

    by lgw (121541) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @02:59PM (#39737975) Journal

    That fetus didn't sneak in there when the mother wasn't looking. The very definition of responsibility is caring for those affected by your choices, whether the outcome was intentional or not.

  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lgw (121541) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @03:21PM (#39738193) Journal

    Yes, I'm walking in public, but I'M INVISIBLE!

    I don't have my name on my shirt. If I don't call attention to myself, I should have the expectation that no one will remember tomorrow where I walked today. Just because data can be recorded doesn't mean it should be.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @03:22PM (#39738201)

    No you won't, you'll burn out a set of points and get stranded on the side of the road, like you used to see every hundred yards or so on the highways in 1968.

  • by hAckz0r (989977) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @03:25PM (#39738245)
    I would generally agree with your assessment. My only issue is that the wording of the Bill is somewhat open-ended, in that it does not say any specific requirements for what gets recorded, only a general statement on "safety" related data. The issue is it could have a type of 'feature creep" where certain organizations push for somewhat unrelated metrics to be collected under the general guise of safety. Is GPS position history safety related? Some might argue it is. I think that any bill passed should enumerate exactly what details are to be recorded, after all, the auto companies need to know what kind of sensors are to be deployed otherwise the costs will eventually get out of hand as new requirements are added. The Government has a history of moving the goal posts if they are not nailed down first.

    shall require event data recorders to capture and store data related to motor vehicle safety covering a reasonable time period before, during, and after a motor vehicle crash or airbag deployment, including a rollover;

  • by couchslug (175151) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @03:28PM (#39738271)

    "Republicans were ike that post-Eisenhower and pre-George Bush."

    Richard Nixon was hardly a defender of civil liberty.

  • by cayenne8 (626475) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @03:59PM (#39738761) Homepage Journal

    No GPS position. Speed, throttle, steering, seatbelt use, airbag deployment, etc. etc. are there

    Well, once you get all this in the car....not a problem next year, adding a rider to the "We love children and have to protect them act"..which requires GPS, and also transmittable to authorities information.

    I mean...it *is* already on the car...we're just adding a new safety feature.

  • by AlamedaStone (114462) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:11PM (#39739685)

    Republicans have gone so far right and the Democrats have gone so far left

    Minor correction: The Republicans have gone so brutally far to the right that the Democrats' gentle drift to the right appears to be leftwards motion; It is only an optical illusion though.

    Although if you really believe Democrats are in favor of communism then facts may not be terribly interesting to you.

  • by readin (838620) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:07PM (#39740329)
    Justice Scalia objected to the Independent Counsel law because it allowed the prosecutor to dig into the President's affairs to try to find a crime, any crime, that had been committed. This differed from traditional law enforcement where there was first an allegation of a specific crime and then the investigators looked for evidence of that crime.

    The black box is like the former. It is something the police can look at to see if any crimes were committed rather than reacting to a crime that was known to have been committed.

    This might not be so bad if we weren't drowning in traffic laws (and every other kind of law). The truth is that it is nearly impossible to drive safely while following all the traffic laws. If the police want to nail you for something, they can follow you around for a while and probably get you. But at least you have a decent chance of knowing they're following, and they have to stop you the moment you commit the offense.

    But the black box allows another approach. For whatever reason, the police decide they don't like you. Now they can pull your black box and check your driving history to find something - anything - at any time. And you may not even remember the event (that time you had to accelerate to avoid the deer - well you exceeded the speed limit and since you don't remember it you can't offer any defense).

    Politicians and celebrities have to be on guard all the time because there is always some paparazzi or other camera on them. The rest of us don't want to live like that.
  • Re:Big Brother? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @08:17PM (#39741399)

    This oft-repeated lie needs to be taken out and shot (along with the people who repeat it)

    Threatening violence on the internet? You must be very brave, good sir.

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    I welcome you to offer your legal services to someone having their license revoked for vehicular homicide and driving while under the influence. I am certain the judge, jury, and families of the victims will all be impressed with your arguments.

    There is no enumerated right to have children. Using the same logic,

    Comparing something done between two consenting adults in private which mostly affects only themselves with something done in public having potentially life-ending consequences for both the involved and uninvolved is not using the same logic.

    Would the founding fathers have said that riding a horse a privilege? Or a bicycle?

    No. However, I am certain that if they were alive today they would certainly regret writing the Constitution and it's first ten amendments with such brevity and prose as to give certain citizens the notion that the Constitution gave them the rights to act however they please in public.

The major difference between bonds and bond traders is that the bonds will eventually mature.

Working...