All new cars in US from 1/9/14 to carry 'Black Box' inc gps

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by VRS, Jan 13, 2014.

  1. VRS

    VRS Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,287
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Not sure whether anyone is aware but from Sept 2014 all new cars in the US will be fitted with 'black box' data recorders, including gps.

    Law enforcement have lobbied for these systems to be introduced on the basis that they need them to determine forensic data in situations where accidents occur.

    Car manufacturers have in passing stated that they might use data to determine whether a vehicle is used within normal limits & to assess 'reasonable normal usage' - presumably so they can turn round to the customer and provide unquestionable info showing that because a vehicle was not used properly any warranty issues may be voided - and so the customer would gave to pay instead.

    However - the black box units also have gps locators.

    This means ALL trips are recorded, including routes, start points, destinations, and... speed of travel.

    Next step then must surely be law enforcement, government, insurance companies etc getting a legal right to access (or monitor?) how fast you were driving, when & where...

    This is not a joke - the head of marketing @ Ford let this one slip out last week - then promptly tried to deny having mentioned it...

    [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-bDICsDlio[/youtube]
     
  2. errol43

    errol43 New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Location:
    Bundaberg
    George Orwell 1984...30 years premature...I just can't believe what is happening in the so called democratic countries of the world.

    Regards Errol 43
     
  3. Bobby Woodlawn

    Bobby Woodlawn New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2013
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Holy City
    You are the only other person in all of My intertubes travel that has even mentioned this. I don't know why this wasn't breaking news on every cable channel everywhere! The media commits Journalistic malfeasance daily. I trust NOTHING they say and question what goes unsaid. I suggest you know where it is in your car and be prepared to destroy it if you ever do something stupid that results in injury or death. -mk
     
  4. PMS

    PMS New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    "What? So you can drone me?!"
    For those who think they'll avoid black boxes by keeping their 'old clunker' until they die you'd better think again.

    Insurance company 'black boxes' are already here in Australia and up and running.
    Don't believe it?

    Well take a look at this...

    http://www.qbe.com.au/Personal/Insurance-Box/Insurance.html

    For now you are being offered a 'discount' if you agree to fit one to your existing car.

    However, rest assured, if you don't install one, or have a new car with one already fitted, you will very soon end up paying much higher premiums.

    Eventually insurance companies will refuse to ensure cars that cannot be monitored.

    Then legislation will be introduced that will make it illegal to drive a vehicle without insurance as is the case in many other countries.

    In other words it will be illegal to drive a car without a black box.

    I'll give it about five years to be fully implemented... On second thoughts I'll stick my neck out and say two years! It's simple technology and the GPS and mobile infrastructure already exists so I can't see why they would delay implementing these devices any longer than necessary.

    Also if you don't believe the collected data will be made fully available to the government, ATO, police and intelligence services then I got a bridge to sell you on Mars!

    And how will they access 'said' data? Simple!
    They'll just download it directly from your black box via the existing mobile network without you even being aware... the same way data is collected from a smart meter.
     
  5. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,727
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    You can buy a GPS vehicle tracker for $50 retail. Big brother is here.
     
  6. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Likes Received:
    510
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    To play Devil's advocate for a moment...

    I don't see what the problem is, unless you are using your car for illegal purposes or breaking the speed limit then having a blackbox in your car can only be a positive thing.

    Thieves won't be stupid enough to steal a car with a GPS in it and even if they do, they can be tracked and if they pull the GPS out of it the car will be illegal to drive so not saleable.

    You would be stupid to speed in your car because if you get into a car crash the blackbox will be able to show how recklessly you were driving and your insuranace won't pay out. It can also issue you with fines automatically if you keep breaking the speed limit, we have tried pointing out the dangers of speeding but some people are not convinced, we spend a fortune of taxpayers' money getting police officers to stand by the side of a road pointing speed cameras at cars, their time could be better spent catching real criminals rather than catching otherwise law abiding citizens doing petty crap.

    If I need to have an alabi I can show that I was elsewhere according to the data in my car (I am sure fingerprint start buttons will soon be mandatory as a way of stopping normal people from stealing cars).

    If we want to monitor who criminals meet up with we can do it by monitoring their cars, instead of having one sting operation we can watch them all at the same time without draining the manpower resources of the police.

    By monitoring everyone we have a fairer system rather than targeting individuals who are suspected of being criminals but who in fact may not be.

    People who it will affect...

    Tin foil hat wearers who basically scream blue murder about most things anyway.
    People who are having affairs or other secret meetings
    People who are selling items which can't be sold through the normal channels, (such as online or through a shop)
    People who are claiming the dole but going out everyday to work
    Criminal organisations who like to meet up
    People who steal cars
    People who don't obey speed limits
    People on the run from the police
    People who are causing damage to their own vehicle then expecting the manufacturer to pick up the tab.

    People who aren't negatively affected...
    People who are not engaged in any criminal activity.
    People not having an affair
    Victims of car crashes
    Victims of car thefts

    If you are concerned that your freedom to commit illegal acts is being eroded away by common sense and sensible precautions then you picked the wrong country to live in, South America might be more to your liking.
     
  7. metalzzz

    metalzzz Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,945
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Australia
    Yet another example of the workings of a fascisit government using big business to drive control of the people.

    Might start up a bicycle business around centerlink zones, could be lucrative
     
  8. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Likes Received:
    510
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    Start up a taxi company, as long as taxi drivers are not required to ask for identification and keep a log of who went where you should be able to make a bit of cash. Most people who want to cycle probably already do.
     
  9. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,807
    Likes Received:
    2,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Devil's advocate jislizard or are you genuine?

    Let's just bar code everyone while we're at it.

    It's not the loss of our freedom to commit illegal acts that is a concern, it is the loss of our privacy that is a concern. Retention of privacy is more important than preventing crime.
     
  10. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    nah they fall off when you shower :p ...easier to microchip the masses
     
  11. metalzzz

    metalzzz Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,945
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Australia
    Cashless society should stop that little issue
     
  12. The Road Home

    The Road Home Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Zeta Reticuli

    Ford Exec Slips and Says the Truth Now Tries to Take His Words Back.


    [​IMG]


    Some time ago it was reported that every car has a black box and in that it recorded how fast you have EVER driven, when and where. It is a record of everything. Jim Farley is Ford's Global VP of Marketing and Sales. He recently told the truth and then tried to retract his words. What he said, which was reported last year, was that the black box in your car is indeed recording everything and because of the GPS installed in your car, the manufacturer knows when a driver has ever been speeding and where. Car manufacturers can tell if you were speeding in a brand new car when you are supposed to not exceed certain limits for warranty purposes. All of this info is recorded. Police want access claiming they need this info to determine what happened in an accident. There is nothing that is ever private at anytime.
     
  13. VRS

    VRS Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,287
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brisbane
    You're missing the point - the fact that ALL travel in a vehicle that YOU OWN is actively monitored is the issue. It is effectively 'policing' the use of the vehicle, providing data that anyone on oath provides statutorily to acquire an insurance policy where required plus a hundred other aspects of one's private life. Don't you see that this 'creep' of information harvesting has only one outcome?

    That is the total monitoring of every aspect of an individual's life - and that is what I object to, plain and simple. After a while, those freedoms which were so hard won over hundreds of years are forgotten - and yes, Terry Gilliam's Brazil is a good analogy. I have absolutely no problem with data units recording things like forward & reverse video data on an SD card, or accelerometers to measure g force for impact analysis - but like those bikie laws, this is to do with widening-out the potential catchment so that a route of entry is created for federal and NGO monitoring of individual behaviour. The fact that GPS data is harvested is the warning bell - and a huge one at that.

    Or am I missing something? Maybe the fact that all voice calls and internet usage is now monitored in many countries has desensitised you to the concept of privacy? Or that if you want to move over $10k of YOUR OWN MONEY, legally earned, you set off alarm bells domestically or internationally as an ORDINARY RESPONSE. I submit that these are EXTRAORDINARY RESPONSES - and anyone thinking that their liberties are not being impinged needs their heads feeling....

    As far as your comment 'By monitoring everyone we have a fairer system rather than targeting individuals who are suspected of being criminals but who in fact may not be' goes, again you miss the point - ALL of your activity is suspect until proved otherwise - and there are many many instances where the innocent have fallen foul of over-zealous agencies looking for something (or someone) to 'do'. That's a fact - and I hope that it doesn't befall you - because you then might realise what ultimate folly these precedents being quietly set now are...
     
  14. silvertorrent

    silvertorrent New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2012
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Victoria, Australia
    How sad; instead of reading about the latest developments for the flying cars of 2015 (Back to the Future) I'm seeing the steady march towards the Orwellian state (1984). =(
     
  15. CriticalSilver

    CriticalSilver New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,725
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    You guys are just too untrusting. The state is here to protect your privacy. Look here is a police man being prosecuted for illegally recording someone's personal data ...

    Isn't it clear, they will not breach their duty, abuse their position, or abuse your trust, when it comes to your personal information because it is illegal to do so.

    Except where they pretend not to be collecting your personal information, as per NSA, its five eyes and Edward Snowden. As that would demonstrate their complete and utter breach of duty, abuse of position, and abuse of trust, they can't admit to monitoring you already.

    So what makes the 5 spying eyes of the state good, but the single eye of a peeping-tom policeman bad? Surely there should be a consistent rule of law for all and people's information is their own and their trust that their information is their own shouldn't be breached by illicit surveillance from the State, either by their funded corporations who sell vehicles for commuting or their intelligence agencies.

    But perhaps, as Jislizard writes, if everyone was under surveillance everyone would be better off and maybe there wouldn't even be any crime? What's wrong with that? Surely you could only disagree if you have something to hide. Or better yet, perhaps the State could just redefine itself as a prison in which the population have more or less privileges based on the severity of their crime, starting with being born at Sev-1.

    If the State just assumes everyone is guilty, how much easier would their jobs be? The productivity benefits for the Controllers, and then all the commercial benefits of Big Data profiling and selling access to those under surveillance! You know it makes sense! RFID newborn babies and the world would be a safer place and only criminals would complain.

    Although it might be an ugly, Stalin-esque world where people are forever waiting for someone to grab them off the street or out of their beds when some petty bureaucrat up the hierarchy orders their detention or rehabilitation for some false-positive, algorithmic profiling error, or arbitrary backdating of new laws! But that's a small price to pay to eliminate crime, increase productivity and map out your product and service needs, isn't it? :rolleyes:

    By the way, it is well known that all surveillance does is move the problem. It does not address root causes or resolve societal dis-function at all. It just moves a problem somewhere else, once the source of surveillance is known. Like fixed speed cameras that only fine ignorant visitors because the locals have learnt to avoid them. The only way surveillance works in a totally controlling way, is if it is ubiquitous. So once the path is commenced, a little bit of surveillance is never, ever enough, because it moves the problem and then needs to be extended. It will not stop and it can never end, without admission of being wrong and wasteful in the first place.

    The irony is that criminals are the only ones motivated to avoid the surveillance technologies deployed to catch them and honest people don't need to be monitored. So logically, in the end surveillance cannot be intended for criminals who will avoid it, but to monitor normal people...mums and dads, and extract income and information about them along the way. The criminals are just the pretext to expand the rent-seeking vampirism of the state over the population.
     
  16. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Likes Received:
    510
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    Maybe I just lead a boring life :)

    I don't sell guns or drugs, I am not having a secret affair, I drive within the speed limits, I am not part of a criminal organisation and I don't want to see lots of idiots on the roads where I drive.

    I guess I don't really have a private life, boring as I said. I don't welcome anything that would impact on whatever remaining privacy we have left but I also don't have a knee jerk reaction everytime the term "infringement of privacy" comes up. I understand that some people have things they want to keep private, either from loved ones or from the government or from everyone in society, I am just not one of those people.

    Generally whenever I hear of a new measure I try to see both sides of the argument, sure, any privacy measures will be open to abuse, something like 5 million people in America have access to your private information, not just government agencies but also contractors who work for the government. In France, private medical records have been sold to insurance companies by dodgy civilian workers. Unfortunately where people and money are involved you are going to have conflicts of interest.

    We already have speed cameras on the roads and licence plate recognition software, all very expensive and timeconsuming, and inefficient.

    As I like to hear all the angles I am happy to be persuaded that this is the worst thing since unsliced bread so by all means, put up a theoretical scenario where this new technology would be an actual detrement to a person, rather than just the harder to define, loss of privacy. Loss of privacy is reason enough of course but it is hard to argue that you don't want to deter criminals because it might infringe your privacy. An decent example would go a long way to persuading others.

    Privacy is one of those issues which is very emotive, but is also a great excuse for the criminals to keep doing criminal things.
     
  17. PMS

    PMS New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2013
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    "What? So you can drone me?!"
    Okay so you have nothing to hide and as long as you aren't breaking the law so what's the problem?

    So let's say the government makes it illegal to own PM's and begins tracking those who it suspects may own PM's. Would that bother you?

    Or how about you wake up one morning to discover your savings and superannuation have been confiscated (Cyprus style bail in) to prop up a bunch of corrupt investment bankers who lost a few $trillion on a shipload of dodgy derivative bets leveraged at 100 to 1.

    After no joy in getting your money back because the government is bed with the bankers you join tens of thousands of other likewise law-abiding and similarly ripped-off citizens to arrange a mass protest... and guess what? Your every move is monitored and you are arrested for sedition along with those you visited, or rang, or texted or emailed. Don't a have a problem with that?

    If you don't that's fine. Just submit, bend over, grit your teeth and think of England.
    I'm sure you'll get used to the pain... eventually!
     
  18. Jislizard

    Jislizard Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Likes Received:
    510
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    Well I knew taking a contrary position on this issue would not be popular, particularly on a forum where there is a prepping subforum.

    All travel in all vehicles on public roads are required to obey the law, people don't. Asking people to obey the law isn't working. Standing by the roadside and handing out the occassional $100+ fine isn't working. Monitoring usage allows the police to go back in time and look at previous data, look for trends. People who speed don't just do it once and then never do it again. Someone who continuly speeds may be able to get away with it now because of the limited manpower available to adequately police the law. By being monitored they either get caught or they modify their antisocial behaviour. Either way, the general public wins.

    Generally people don't move $10k around, people who deal in bullion might very well, in which case a simple explanation as to the nature of your business should suffice. Other people move it occassionally, car purchase, paying off a loan etc. Once again a simple explanation should suffice. Other people who are doing it more often might not be quite so benign. Sadly large sums of money are involved in crime and if by simply explaining why I am moving money around I can help to cut down crime then it is a small inconvenience. It really isn't that big a deal. People do move money around to avoid paying tax and they do move it around to pay for illegal goods, the harder it is for them to do this the better.


    Not worried about this, in fact the more surveliance they do on me the safer I am. For sure I could stop off at a motorway service station, at the same time some outlaw bikies might be having an illegal meeting there. To the casual police officer following or staking the place out, I might be involved. To a super computer who can trace my driving around for the past several years to see if I had ever met with them before, who could look up my phone records to see if I had ever been in contact with them before, the computer would not look at this co-incidence and see a conspiracy.

    Like most people I don't like being told what to do, or not being given a choice in the decisions that affect. But unfortunately we can't rely on people's good nature to do the right thing, Brazil, 1984 and all the other dystopian films are entertainment, you are treating them like documentries.
     
  19. Load of Bullion

    Load of Bullion Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sydney
    Part of the problem is this: It is not about youbut you think it is about you. ,IMHO. (don't take this personally, because your view is shared by many others whom are complacent about corporations and governments)

    Thought experiment: Are you a reporter or a whistle blower willing to leak information about government or corporate crimes the public should have every right to know.
    A lack of freedom can mean almost everything is traceable. If there is a break down in communications due to government and corporate surveillance (people unwilling to risk meeting up and talking to let the public know the truth), we all may suffer.
    This scenario can potentially spiral to greater corruption and tyranny.
    For any semblance of some sort of democracy to work, people should be informed in the broadest of manners in order to make decisions. A surveillance grid could potentially crush that.
     
  20. steve.rsa

    steve.rsa Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    PER
    It will take about, ummmm, 30 seconds before some "hack" will allow data to be modified on one of these things. Drive into an undercover parking lot and don't come out for the rest of the day perhaps, or will the data just look like you didn't?

    all, of course, as long as they don't base it on the apparently unhackable Apple TV 3 that is :)
     

Share This Page