'Your' Car Won't Be After 2015

'Your' Car Won't Be After 2015 By Eric Peters on 4.25.12 @ 6:07AM
Mandatory "Event Data Recorders" will even know you're speeding in reverse.
After a certain point, it's not paranoia.
The latest brick in the wall is the predictably named "Moving Ahead For Progress in the 21st Century Act," also known as Senate Bill 1813. (See here for the full text of the bill itself; the relevant section is 31406.) This legislation -- already passed by the Senate and likely to be passed by the House -- will impose a legal requirement that all new cars made beginning with the 2015 models be fitted with so-called Event Data Recorders (EDRs). These are the "black boxes" you may have read about that store data about how you drive -- including whether you wear a seat belt and how fast you drive -- ostensibly for purposes of post-accident investigation.
These EDRs are not new. GM and other automakers have been installing them in new cars for years -- in GM's case, since the late 1990s. What's new is the proposed federal mandate, which would make it illegal to not have one -- or (in all likelihood) to remove or disable one in a car required to have the device.
The question arises: why?
Several possibilities come to mind:
First, the EDRs could be -- and almost certainly will be -- tied into your vehicle's GPS. (Most new and late model cars, conveniently, already have this, too.) Then data about your driving can be transmitted -- as well as recorded. To whom? Your insurance company, of course. Progressive Insurance already has such a system in place -- voluntary, for the moment.
When EDRs are mandated, you will no longer have a choice.
We'll be told it's all for the sake of (groan) "safety" -- just like the old 55 MPH highway speed limit and every radar trap in the country. Of course, it's really for the sake of revenue -- the government's and the insurance company's. Your rates will be "adjusted" in real time, for every incident of "speeding" or not buckling up. It'll be so much more efficient than using cops to issue tickets. After all, so many fishes escape! With an EDR in every car, no one will escape. Your "adjusted" premium will be waiting for you when you get home.
You've got mail!
And naturally, they -- the government, insurance companies -- will be able to track your every move, noting (and recording) where you've been and when. This will create a surveillance net beyond anything that ever existed previously. Some will not sweat this: After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why worry? Except for the fact that, courtesy of almost everything we do being either "illegal" or at least "suspicious," we all have a great deal to hide. The naivety of the Don't Worry, it's No Big Deal crowd is breathtaking.
But the last possibility is probably the creepiest: EDRs tied into your car's GPS will give them -- the government and/or corporations -- literal physical control over (hack) "your" vehicle. This is not conspiracy theorizing. It is technological fact. Current GM vehicles equipped with the same technology about to be mandated for every vehicle can be disabled remotely. Just turned off. All the OnStar operator has to do is send the appropriate command over the GPS to your car's computer, which controls the engine. It is one of the features touted by OnStar -- of course, as a "safety" feature.
In the future, it will be used to limit your driving -- for the sake of "energy conservation" or, perhaps, "the environment." It will be the perfect, er, vehicle, for implementing U.N. Agenda 21 -- the plan to herd all of us formerly free-range tax cattle into urban feedlots. So much easier to control us this way. No more bailing out to the country or living off the grid - unless you get there (and to your work) by walking.
The pieces are all coming together.
First, computer-controlled cars. Next, widespread adoption of GPS in cars. Then, EDRs tied into them.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 30, 8:47 pm, "Ray Keller" <LEFTARD TROLLS ARE DESPERATE> wrote:

And the problem with this is?
Wouldn't you like to know where Gummer spends his time when he says he is "working"?
TMT
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ray Keller" <LEFTARD TROLLS ARE DESPERATE> wrote in message

(D) the information is retrieved for the purpose of determining the need for, or facilitating, emergency medical response in response to a motor vehicle crash.
(1) 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;
Yup definitely an evil government plot.....
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

to
and
What if I CHOOSE to not have it?
Yep, them libs you can CHOOSE to kill a fetus, or fuck a guy in the ass, but that's the ONLY choice you get.
--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It would seem to me that would be your right under the 5th Amendment, since you would be, in effect, testifying against yourself.
Seems to me that it would be quite easy for someone to hack the system to either prevent the data from being recorded (or broadcast) or possibly simply limiting the value it can record by imposing a hardware/firmware limit.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
driving a motor vehicle is a privilege - not a right. At least that's what the DMV says.
So they are not violating any of your rights - they are just trying to protect the public.
If nothing else, think of it as - "for the children"?
:)
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Richard wrote:

Children aren't supposed to be driving. :)
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I learned to drive a tractor and haul farm equipment at age 9. Did so perfectly legally on public roads at the time. My kids have been "driving", more accurately steering, since they were big enough (>6) to sit in my lap and see over the steering wheel to steer the van while I controlled gas and brakes. (Fortunately, perfectly legal on private roads.) This summer my 14 year-old will learn how to drive a VW with a stick. (Again perfectly legal on private roads.)
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SaPeIsMa wrote:

Which has nothing to do with the DMV or public roads. I learned to drive, on our long driveway. The same driveway where I rebuilt my '66 GTO. My driving instructor didn't belive that I hadn't been driving on the local roads & highways the first day the class was actually allowed to drive. :)
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
17:58:25 -0400 typed in misc.survivalism the following:

    When (and where) I learned to drive, the rules were simple: stay off the paved road, no faster than five miles an hour over your age.     Three in the tree full sized pickup trucks.
--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
pyotr filipivich wrote:

I learned in a 61 Ford Galaxy 500. :)
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 06 May 2012 23:30:19 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

I learned and took my licence test on a 31 Ford "A"
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@rogers.com wrote:

You're a lot older than I am, though. That 'Galaxy' was less than 10 years old. :)
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:58:47 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

The model "A" was only 25 years old and Dad drove it for another 5 years before trading up to a ten year old former mail truck for $300.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@rogers.com wrote:

My dad bought that Galaxy from an uncle for $150 because of electrical problems. I found the problem & fixed it for 25 cents. One of the tail lights was shorted between the filaments. My first car was a blue '63 Pontiac Catalina convertible that I bought for $300 in '70.
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 10 May 2012 10:15:44 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

Mine was a '50 Austin A40 @ $200 in Feb. '57. Spent half the night looking out the window admiring it!
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@rogers.com wrote:

My next car was better: I bought a red '66 GTO for $400 in '72. It had a blown engine, and I rebuilt it and converted from a 2 speed to a three speed automatic. I also converted it from single to dual exhaust, which involved welding custom chromed pipes. All that cost me under $150. :)
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.