Feds to require a "black box" in every vehicle

[rambone]

Next month, the Ministry of Traffic Safety will be dictating that every vehicle be equipped with a "black box" to record your every movement, feed information to the Federal government, and be used against you in court.


Automotive Black Boxes, Minus the Gray Area

 

[indykid]

There are a lot of vehicles that already have such devices. Makes it easier for big brother to incarcerate an honest person who was unlucky enough to accidently try to defy a law of physics and lose.

 

[eldirector]

I didn't see anything in that article about a federal requirement for the "black box", that it would record "your every movement", or that it would even be capable of "transmitting the info to the feds".

Warrants have been issued for data recorders for years, so no new info there.

The article actually talks a lot about balancing the technology with both cost and privacy.

What was the problem again? I must have missed it.

 

[Keyser Soze]

since 2006

 

[Rob377]

Will the black boxes lock you in the car and drive you to the Gov't slave camps too?

 

[IndySSD]

I didn't see anything in that article about a federal requirement for the "black box", that it would record "your every movement", or that it would even be capable of "transmitting the info to the feds".

Sorry but this article states what it "expects" from the NHTSA and if you don't know what black boxes are capable of... then you probably should go check them out. They are indeed capable of monitoring every detail of your movements in your vehicle and transferring that information to whomever can access it.... currently this is done manually but lets just think about how hard it would be for a government agency to tap into... I'd guess no harder than telling OnStar to shut off your vehicle...

Next month, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is expected to declare that all vehicles must contain an event data recorder, known more commonly as a “black box.” The device, similar to those found in aircraft, records vehicle inputs and, in the event of a crash, provides a snapshot of the final moments before impact.

The article actually talks a lot about balancing the technology with both cost and privacy.

What was the problem again? I must have missed it.

Highlighted the "problem" for you, even though you stated it already.

I try to stay away from most of the tinfoil but this is a legitimate concern.

The funny thing about the people who say "Then don't drive" is that they often fail to realize there are actually cameras used for facial recognition all over most major cities....

If you don't get the feeling someone is watching you yet.... you're either WAY out living a frontier lifestyle or you're not aware of what is being done in our cities "for our own good"....

Seriously you should see the city camera system monitoring.... it's amazing and scary all at the same time.... think "The Dark Knight" in the scene where Morgan Freeman states he'll be resigning, only in public places....... for now....


Oh, and I forgot to state:

In B4 "But RAMBONE..... you got this from some crackpot website that doesn't know anything about anything.. just crazy people!!"

 

[bobzilla]

 

[rambone]

What was the problem again? I must have missed it.

Mandating intrusive and expensive technology that will make our vehicles more expensive and will be used against us in court.

There's nothing more fun than paying hundreds of dollars to replace some gizmo or sensor in your vehicle when it goes bad. This is just what struggling Americans need, to pay for some stupid tracking box to be retro-fitted into their vehicle because the Feds demand it.

 

[rambone]

Oh, and I forgot to state:

In B4 "But RAMBONE..... you got this from some crackpot website that doesn't know anything about anything.. just crazy people!!"

I found this reading Popular Science.

New Federal Rules To Require Black Boxes to Record Driver Activity in Every Car | Popular Science

Paranoia

 

[eldirector]

My Jeep has this device. It does NOT have GPS. There is no way to "monitor my every movement". It can log data from any sensor (throttle, seat belt, ABS, etc...), and store about 15 seconds or so of it. It does not have any networking or cellular capability, so cannot transmit anything to anyone. There is a diagnostic port, and you have to physically plug a scanner into it.

My truck DOES have OnStar, so this device can be accessed remotely. It also has GPS capability, but no additional "logging" capacity. I CHOSE this, though, so it is not some sort of crazy conspiracy. I can also disable it pretty easily, by simply unplugging the OnStar control box.

Now, if the feds required a data uplink and full GPS logging, I would be upset. If they want a rolling 15 second log that requires a warrant or permission to access, fine. Besides, courts have already ruled that you own that data, so just plug in a device that purges the log when in park. Or buy/restore an old car!

 

[IndySSD]

 

[kludge]

OnStar.

Already there. Already tracks you. (ETA: maybe, maybe not, see below) Data has already been subpeonaed. GM more than happy to hand it over.

Also the GM black box (and perhaps others) records throttle/brake input, vehicle speed etc., to protect GM in the event of a lawsuit against them after an accident.

They can also remotely shut down your vehicle... I'm going to go look for the OnStar data in the murder trial article...

ETA: Here you go...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315493,00.html

I'm having a hard time finding any evidence that OnStar can track you though, so I may need to retract that.

Unrelated but interesting...

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/27387266/detail.html
http://www.examiner.com/homeland-se...atching-over-you-or-watching-you?render=print

 

[IndySSD]

OnStar.

Already there. Already tracks you. Data has already been subpeonaed. GM more than happy to hand it over.

Also the GM black box (and perhaps others) records throttle/brake input, vehicle speed etc., to protect GM in the event of a lawsuit against them after an accident.

One of the many reasons I don't/won't buy a chevy vehicle with On Star.

When my 06 colorado bites the dust I'll probably move to Ford or Dodge.

 

[rjstew317]

If you drive classics you don't need to worry about this crap

 

[rambone]

My truck DOES have OnStar, so this device can be accessed remotely. It also has GPS capability, but no additional "logging" capacity. I CHOSE this, though, so it is not some sort of crazy conspiracy. I can also disable it pretty easily, by simply unplugging the OnStar control box.

As long as you choose these gizmos, its cool with me. When these mandates roll out, it is quite different. It has implications on the price of buying and maintaining vehicles, privacy infringements, violates your private property, free market intrusion, and its just an all around ineffective idea.

What good is it? Will it save lives??

Now, if the feds required a data uplink and full GPS logging, I would be upset. If they want a rolling 15 second log that requires a warrant or permission to access, fine.

What if I think that modest request of theirs is still too much? I don't want my data recorded! Who grants the government the power to mandate this?

Besides, courts have already ruled that you own that data, so just plug in a device that purges the log when in park.

Yet another gadget Americans have to buy to avert invasions of their privacy? What happens if I uninstall the thing, if I truly own it? Will Big Brother send his goons to arrest me?

Or buy/restore an old car!

Are we sure that old cars are exempt? We are still waiting on the Royal Edict to be given to us.

 

[rambone]

OnStar.

Already there. Already tracks you. Data has already been subpeonaed. GM more than happy to hand it over.

OnStar is not mandated by the Federal Government, right? I won't buy a car that forces me to be tracked. The free market lets people buy the gadgets they want. This is no longer true when things are being mandated.

If you drive classics you don't need to worry about this crap

What happens when they demand that you install it on your classic car if you want to get plates? Will you start to care then?

 

[rjstew317]

What happens when they demand that you install it on your classic car if you want to get plates? Will you start to care then?

they can't, just like they can't require seat belts in cars that were built prior 1968 when they were made mandatory in all new vehicles, or emissions standards on vehicles built prior to 1974. they can't tell you that you have to retro fit an entirely new electrical system in you classic car to support their device. all they can do is require the automotive industry to include these devices in new vehicles after a set date.

And don't put words in my mouth, I never said I didn't care. You don't know me from Adam, so don't presume to know what I do, and what I don't care about

 

[gunowner930]

OK, so question for the gearheads. is this article referring to the PCM? If not where is this "black box" located and how is the data stored? I know you can tune the pcm to adjust the A/F ratio and what not, but frankly thats above my head.

 

[rambone]

they can't, just like they can't require seat belts in cars that were built prior 1968 when they were made mandatory in all new vehicles, or emissions standards on vehicles built prior to 1974. they can't tell you you have to retro fit an entirely new electrical system in you classic car to support their device. all they can do is require the automotive industry to include these devices in new vehicles after a set date.

Can't?? The Feds "can't" do a lot of things. But every day it is something new.

Just because they haven't yet doesn't mean that they won't or can't.

 

[rjstew317]

ex post facto