Spies Riding Shotgun

Slashdot has covered before the proliferation of black boxes - event data recorders - in modern automobiles, that automatically record data about what the car has been doing and make it available after the fact to police, insurance companies, and people suing you - just about everyone except you, in fact. We'll add to that with yet another story about the computerized spy riding shotgun in your new car.

[OT] The Complete Rules to Calling Shotgun...

... and the subsequent amendments [nildram.co.uk].

Re:[OT] The Complete Rules to Calling Shotgun...

Being as how everyone is created equal, men have the same right as women to the front seat of the car. i.e. women don't own the front seat.

Man, this guy is obviously single.

Looking forward..

..to the day when my every every bowel movement is recorded for the enjoyment of future generations.

"You can't shut it off, and you can't manipulate it," I had that trouble when I had a Ginseng and Viagra chaser.

This is terrible!

This is an absolute invasion of privacy! Imagine: recording every questionable driving decision you make. I wonder where I can get one for my daughter's car?

Re:This is terrible!

If your question is at all serious, there are products that you can use.

For instance, The CarChip [ambientweather.com].

My personal belief is vehement opposition to this kind of monitoring. Nevertheless, it is available. If she's driving a car you own, you can install it without any problem. If the car is hers, you might want to check with an attorney before installing any monitoring/spying equipment.

Jim

Re:This is terrible!

Or perhaps you should just learn to be a decent parent and, oh, I don't know, TRUST that you raised her right? Jesus. Kids do dumb things. It's a given. Your job is to teach her how to fly, not to fly with her every second of every day. That only teaches her to be dependent.

I love my car..

I drive a '92 Honda Civic CX (nobody has them, they suck that much). It's a total hunk of junk, but i love it. It does precisely what i tell it to (at speeds of under 60 mph -- it don't accelerate too well), gets 35 mpg, and takes me from point A to point B. Now i have another reason -- because it's not looking at what i'm doing.

Personal black boxes arent automatically bad.

In a fiction series I read recently (Hominids / Humans / Hybreds by Robert J. Sawyer), in the Neanderthal world, everyone had an implanted companiion that recorded everything their host did, and uploaded it to an Alibi Archive. Essentially, everyone had a personal blackbox that they could look through later, or that could be used against them in criminal proceedings.

One of the effects this had was that no one would be able to make false accusations against you, because your alibi archive would vindicate you instantly. It also meant that no one could really get away with crime.

Of course, that view of things was largly utopian. The general arguement against this sort of tech in reality is that humans tend to be corruptible. So I dont think that trying such a concept for every person is ideal.

However, for things like using a car, I dont see it as a problem. As long is the recording media is practically impossible to tamper with, (in so far as any attempt to alter the contents would be detected as an alteration). And also, the laws would need to be written such that they could only demand to see very specific time segments in the recording. Assuming that only yourself and government authorities could access it, it would solve alot of problems.

- No one would drive like an asshat if someone would compell them to prove that they werent.

- You would have ironclad proof against bogus tickets and insurance charges.

- The only thing you really give up for the two previous items is the ability to lie about the above two.

Then again, I dont drive at all, so its all a non issue to me.

END COMMUNICATION

You know what?

I NEED the ability to lie about the above two. Why? Because I live in New York City, where speed limits are set arbitrarily low in really stupid places for the express purpose of allowing cops to pick up people for speeding and feed the city coffers.

If anything, this technology SHOULD allow one to completely eliminate speed limits from the books. Exceeding the speed limit DANGEROUSLY can be called "reckless driving," so why do we have have to have extra laws for it in addition to reckless driving violations? For one reason only: those who make the laws realize that one can drive fast without driving dangerously, but if they let us do that they'd never make any money.

Driving at 85 mph in the rain on a twisty road in the middle of the night with cars on it? Yes. Your ass should be prosecuted.

Driving at 80 mph "in a 50" in the middle of the night, with not a cloud in the sky, on a completely empty, straight road? No.

Re:You know what?

I love people who think the law makes what's right, rather than what's right making the law.

I also can't believe how many times I've gotten into precisely that argument on Slashdot.

As long as they come with an off switch.

I see nothing inherintly bad with this technology itself. In fact, it could prove quite useful at times. But it is vitally important that buyers be informed of these systems, and they must be equipped with an off switch.

Does anyone know if all existing systems such as On-star can be turned off easily by the driver?

Re:As long as they come with an off switch.

So I could switch it off at the precise moment that it might become useful to the innocent old dear I'm about to run down by driving like a dickhead?

So, your assumption is that if I want a little privacy, I must be about to commit a crime. Why not insist that I have video cameras installed in my home in case I should decide to commit date rape some evening?

There are no rights violated here!

You knowingly are purchasing the vehicle as-is. If you are unsure of what they are putting in there, then don't buy it. No violation was performed.

If government forces these items on us, then we should fight that monopoly force called government. If a private manufacturer wants to push us on it, we can tell them to shove it and not buy their product.

Ok, there are spies. Now what?

Sorry to AC, but submitted for your consideration:

1) Who owns the info? You're in a crash*, can you seize the info form the other guy's car to prove your innocence?
1a) How? Go to the junkyard and rip out his computer?
1b) Should we all carry OBD2 down-loading recorders? Scene of the crash, you barge into the other car, plug in and download while the tow-truck is still attaching to drag it away?

2) If you're in a crash*, how do you protect your rights of posession to the data? (You must agree that at the very least, posession of the car implies posession of any/all devices therein, so any data stored within those devices MAY have vague posession-rules, but holding the black box in your hands at least allows you control of that data...)

3) How do I safely rig something to destroy or scramble my car's computer? As a last-ditch effort to protect my privacy, shouldn't I have a "Destroy" button somewhere? I'm thinking thermite, but maybe a strong capacitor might be better, both carry risks, but not as much as the data falling in the wrong hands BEFORE my lawyers have a chance to see it...) No news is better than bad news?

*They're all "crashes" /.ers, there's no such thing as an accident. Someone's always going too fast.

National Motorists Association

This article quotes Erick Skrum of the National Motorists Association. It's a great political organization that fights multiple battles of interest to motorists, including black boxes.

Consider joining the NMA: http://www.motorists.org/ [motorists.org]

Insurance

What worries me the most is the small savings you get on your insurance for installing a tracker unit that gives the insurance company the right to track you (your speed, time of day, location, etc.). At first it'll be a small savings, then, most people won't care, and everyone will have one, and then it'll basically be a large fine if you don't have one. I guess I'd better continue with my plan of biking everywhere; it's better for me anyway :)

Electric mother-in-law...

All they need to do is add a speech synthesizer and a place to deposit 1/2 your income, and its like marriage in a box (and yes, I do realise this box has nothing to do with sex, which makes the simulation even more accurate).

Drivecam

Oh, well, I suppose anything is better than what happened to this guy. [topspeed.co.il]

It's a Drivecam video - it records the last 30 seconds or so of driver video and only saves it if an accident occurs. The guy was probably kicking himself for installing it. It probably killed whatever insurance claim he had.

From TFA

Or take the driver who races his Miata one weekend and files a warranty claim the next. What are the chances that his data recorder will rat him out to the manufacturer who then voids the warranty?

So, he knowingly voided his warranty by racing his Miata. He then tries to defraud the manufacturer by filing a false warranty claim (he no longer has a warranty) and HE is the victim? Give me a fucking break.

For those of use who do not intentionally void our warranty, "black box" recording devices should be seen as a positive: overall, the manufacturer will save on fraudulent warrantee repairs, and warrantee coverage can improve.

rat yourself out

Amendment V [findlaw.com]:
[...] nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself [...]

But we're already compelled to give DNA, urine and tissue sample evidence, so paying for, maintaining and powering devices we own just to spy on us seems inevitable. That crazy old Constitution, with its quaint notions of human rights.

Lets get all excited

Now that someone may be able to verify if we were all obeying the rules we were supposed to while driving. How come no one complained when the speed limits were put in place? How come no one rejects car rental policies when they read them, opting for the bus instead of their draconian conditions?

How dare they monitor the speeds we drive, or where we go, in fact how dare they do it now with police and speed cams. This is a total outrage. I am so outraged I cant even be arsed to write the rest of this post because I must devote all my brain power to the massive invasion of my privacy thats happening at every level in Slashworld.

Just don't ever do anything wrong

As long as you never ever do anything wrong, and never make a mistake, you'll be fine. If you're not guilty why do you care if everyone is watching you?

My VW

I have a 2003 Volkswagen Golf, and have read that the data recording box in it records the number of time the ABS is engaged, fuel emisions, average speed and trip distance, number of times the seat belt isn't worn by the driver - pretty much everything.

What I hate about it is that the car demands it's service with a flashing light and tone, only a Volkswagen mechanic can turn the alert off. The dataport is hidden behind a removal panel below the radio, and there's no way in hell that my independant mechanic can get the thing to stop beeping at me because I didn't volunteer to be overcharged by a VW mechanic.

Personally, I think that all the information on black boxes should be accessible to the driver, and additionally, that there should be a standard interface port and protocol so that all mechanics can access the black box. I also think that the exact information being collated should be revealed before you purchase the car.

I'm happy if police can access the information in the case of a serious crash, but I don't want the information being provided to manufacturers without knowing exactly what my car is telling them. I don't have anything to hide about my driving habits etc and I am a safe driver and don't speed, but I resent not being able to choose my own independant mechanic without a great deal of inconvinience, and I don't like not knowing exactly what my car is recording.

Would be good if it weren't half-assed

The fact of the matter is that these are only good for people attacking you. If they added a camera that looked out the front window of the vehicle, and recorded the last 30 seconds of data from that as well, it would be good. Then, not only could the know what was done, but might have some clue as to why it was done. Knowing what happened without knowing why it happened...it's pretty much useless for things like this.

--Ender

The DRM of Crash Test Dummies

"You can't shut it off, and you can't manipulate it..."

...But you can pull the plug. I've found that what appears to be that suspicious black box under the dash of my '02 Elantra. Disconnecting it does not affect the car alarm, radio, ignition, or any other vital feature nessisary to the car's operation.

Honestly, I don't mind the fact that they exist... As long as they are only used in the event of a crash and only at your option. I say that above all else because that box is your property, crash or no crash. The information therein is yours to release or not to release and should be covered as the 5th amendment would be used to protect your innocence. This device cannot run a-ground on the same DRM issues that affect consoles, software and music-- You know, the products you bought but don't actually own? That information is yours, recorded on a device you bought inside the car you own.

Now granted, it may very well be the only thing that proves your innocence. That said, story does have the right idea, however. These things are way too prone to abuse to be used without the proper safeguards in place.

Brilliant

Board spokesman Keith Holloway said public concerns about personal privacy shouldn't get in the way of providing a valuable tool for accident investigators.

Yeah, don't let public concerns stop you from doing whatever the hell you want. It doesn't stop anyone else.

Constitutional rights... man!

Actually, a lot of these posts raise an interesting question. If technology is going to be able to tell everything about you, for good or ill, what exactly is your right not to testify against yourself worth?

He was too fucking old to drive Goddamnit!

I really love this part of the article:

The National Transportation Safety Board called for requiring standardized recorders in all light-duty vehicles after it was unable to ascertain what happened when an elderly driver plowed through a farmer's market in Santa Monica, Calif., last year, killing and injuring scores of people.

OK, let me be the first to call it since the NTSB is a bunch of politically correct pussies who don't want to piss off the fucking geezers in the AARP. The guy who caused this accident was too fucking old to drive, OK! He was 86 years old, according to this article [cbs2.com] he had "... a medical condition called a "second-degree heart block" that can cause the heart to stop beating for several seconds.", raising the question of why we are letting someone who has a bad heart that can stop beating during times of stress drive a motor vehicle. This guy's reflexes were gone, he couldn't adequately control the pedals because he had had hip replacement surgeries he might have had cognitive deficits as well as severe visual ones. He was just too fucking old to operate a motor vehicle, and guess what! There's millions more like him out there. Old folks are incredibly dangerous behind the wheel. We don't need black boxes in every car, we need annual vision, reaction and cognition testing for all drivers over 70 years old, and those who don't pass lose their licenses right then and there. While we're at it we can strip the licenses of anyone who has more than one DUI or who causes an accident where someone loses life or limb, this would go a long way towards making our roads a lot safer.

Does this suck if you're one of the old people in question? Well yes it does, but I find it interesting that the people who whine about restricting the driving privileges of the elderly have no problem with restricting the driving privileges of teenagers. Admittedly teenagers are bad drivers, but they're going to get better as they age, someone who's 16 years old will probably be a better and safer driver in 10 years when they're 26, the same cannot be said for a 70 year old. And while it might suck for elderly drivers to lose their licenses it kind of sucks for the rest of us when they lose control of a vehicle and kill 10 people and send 63 more to the hospital or in my case fail to yield right of way on a sunny day, plow into my motorcycle and cost me my left leg below the knee.

Oregone, gone nuts!

Oregon is working on a toll-road system that downloads global positioning satellite data and odometer readings at the gasoline pump to collect fuel taxes on each gallon based on the amount a motorist drives.

Brilliant. Instead of estimating an average car mileage and using that as a gauge of road use per gallon and adding a fixed price to each gallon of gasoline, Oregon is going to show us how smart they can be! They will get to pay for the development, deployment and upkeep of totally unnecessary and invasive computer system. Imagine people's glee at getting to pay more for my gasoline because they buy an economy car that gets more miles to the gallon.