Secret Data gathering

[chriswt]

Whether information stored thus should be made available for criminal evidence, well why not. As Carrot states, it can protect the innocent too

I haven't got a problem with this either.

Absolutely, and further more why do any of us want to pay out through our insurance premiums for drivers who makes claims due soley to an accident caused by reckless and/or dangerous driving.

EDIT: However after reading ***'s post he does make a very good case against!

 

[Deleted member 6183]

I don't really have a problem with the 'black box' but I'd join in to get rid of the Daily Mail.

 

[st4]

It would make a good poll this. I am genuinely surprised that more aren't ademently against the idea....

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The only thing to fear (based upon what I've read about the technology described at the top of the thread), is if you do wrong, and it results in the unthinkable.

If the unthinkable happened, and the driver was driving responsible, then the data is a good thing, as it would substantiate the claims of the driver.

To fear what the data would reveal surely implies that the driver would want to hide the truth, which would in turn suggest that they might not reveal all the facts in the absence of better information. A worrying thought.

I can only think it's a good thing myself, if used in a black box scenario.

 

[chriswt]

It would make a good poll this. I am genuinely surprised that more aren't ademently against the idea....

I'm actually surprised to but I think that under the circumstances its not that intrusive. It would be a lot worse if it was monitored indiscriminately as a money making scheme.

My guess is that these black boxes would be used in difficult cases and/or where serious injury or death occurs.

My car has a tracker fitted and I’m wondering how long it will be before car thieves object to being monitored without giving their consent.

 

[st4]

But thats what it could have the potential to lead to, from a passive method (marketed as device for your legal protection) then to an active road pricing peice of technology.

IMO this government has far too much information on us as we speak, IMO devices like this would invite them to monitor us, when the opposite should be happening.

The fact that black boxes have been used successfully in trucks + planes etc is different, these are commercially operated and monitor the driver/pilot of someone elses machinery and in aircraft cases because many more lives are in 1 plane than 1 car.

I don't want my car monitoring me. I own it, not the other way around.

 

[verytalldave]

It would make a good poll this. I am genuinely surprised that more aren't ademently against the idea....

Likewise.

I can see the day coming whereby the combined use of satnav/global positioning, "they" will know where your car is AND the speed it is being driven. So if you are driving down a 40mph road at 50mph a suitable sum could be automatically deducted from your account without further ado.

THAT is why I would always object to having any device added to my car. Once installed it could be tweaked to provide all sorts of information.

Dont call me nuerotic - because in theory, thats all possible now. All it needs is enough wallys to sign up to the idea.

 

[st4]

Couldn't agree more. And who are "they" anyway. Its already a bit too big brother. "they" I believe are the state and there is now an us and them state of mind appearing, which is a shame. Without going politcal, we elect these people remember.

I also wouldn't have a tracker fitted for that reason, I don't want someone being able to control my car and monitor where it is. Regi plates are more than sufficient. (It is also why I wiould never have Sky TV over my door it plugs into a phone line so your TV habits are being monitored).

What verytalldave mentions is exactly what the black box system would morph into, just give it time. A road pricing come automatic speeding ticket yielding machine.

If this idea is put forward, it must be resisted strongly.

 

[chriswt]

I also wouldn't have a tracker fitted for that reason, I don't want someone being able to control my car and monitor where it is. Regi plates are more than sufficient. (It is also why I wiould never have Sky TV over my door it plugs into a phone line so your TV habits are being monitored).

What verytalldave mentions is exactly what the black box system would morph into, just give it time. A road pricing come automatic speeding ticket yielding machine.

Lots of things are possible with modern technology and some of us have more of a fear of what the state could do than others and although I don’t agree these fears I do however find it perfectly understandable why some people would feel that way.

I’m pretty sure that the people at traker that monitor my car (only if reported stolen or alarm the is triggered) couldn’t care less about my whereabouts or what I do. All I care is that my freedom is less likely to be impaired by some low life stealing my car.

But surely having the know-how to implement something is not the same as actually carrying out threat.

 

[st4]

Tracker was a bad example, but misuse of technology by the government to fufill its "information gathering" i.e. spying is a very real and present threat. I don't want them to ever have the means to spy on me, if they don't have the means, there there is never any possible threat.

Bin charging was an idea I heard under the guise of incouraging recylcing. They would know whats in my rubbish and hence what I spend my money on. They'd have data on how I eat, drink etc. Just too much potential information for a government to have.

 

[chriswt]

Tracker was a bad example, but misuse of technology by the government to fufill its "information gathering" i.e. spying is a very real and present threat. I don't want them to ever have the means to spy on me, if they don't have the means, there there is never any possible threat.

But can't they use satillites to spy on us if they ever wanted to, or any number of other gadgets they have. I've had a nose around plenty of peoples back gardens using google earth!!!! - I do see what you're saying though

Bin charging was an idea I heard under the guise of incouraging recylcing. They would know whats in my rubbish and hence what I spend my money on. They'd have data on how I eat, drink etc. Just too much potential information for a government to have.

I don't like the idea of monitoring bin weight but its not because I'm worried about the PM knowing how much my rubbish weighs but more to do with the negative effect it has on peoples opinion of recylcing and will make people rebel rather than comply.

But would the government really collect data on our eating and drinking habbits, surely that would never happen ?

 

[st4]

No offense, but there is a tad of naivety in that post.

Google earth is a dreadful product of this era but its tech isn't yet able to really spy real time. Blackboxes in cars can.

There was a bit of exajuration in my post about the bins, but its possible. Thats frightening, don't give the state the ability to monitor (i.e. resist these monitoring systems intruction vigerously), then you'll never worry about being snooped on in the first place. All it takes is an unscrupulous government to misuse its technology, much as I'd love to say it this one won't really, but preventing it now will prevent future ones from monitoring you further than they do today.

You can see that the current government is a dab hand @ losing your information, now imagine they had more of it to lose to the hands of criminals.

 

[DaveK]

'Absolutely, and further more why do any of us want to pay out through our insurance premiums for drivers who makes claims due soley to an accident caused by reckless and/or dangerous driving.'...this kind of suggests that with such devices in use, our insurance premiums will stay the same or become cheaper in the long run. Funny how this is never the case though.

 

[DansSlk]

I can also understand the position you and others are taking and thats fine with me but i think there is a little confusion here.

The car already stores the data it needs it for its own uses and a lot of it can be pulled at service so the only real difference is it would be held in one place after an accident instead of being distributed around the car.

So long as that data is freely accessible and more importantly freely erasable after an accident by the user and/or automatically by the car after a certain period its quite a jump to then say the car/government is spying on you since that data is only held in the event of an accident and cannot be sent/accessed remotely, anyways i don't see its use as an absolute for accident investigation but more for insurance purposes kinda like if you chose to switch it on you get a better insurance rate and if you don't want it on fine but they charge you more.

I'm not a Tracker fan either since they can be remotely activated and accessed.

 

[DaveK]

Surely the data held in the vehicles systems is the property of the vehicle owner ( the person who paid for the car ) and as such, should only be made available by them with their consent. ?

 

[DansSlk]

Yep i don't disagree with that hence my comments on making it accessible, erasable and switchable by the owner.

But the data stored in the car already i know is used without permission other than the signature given when the car is signed in and I've never done it with MB but i know BMW M worldwide and Lotus in the US keep an eye on the engine speeds and in BMW's case the transmission so exceed the specified engine speed in the break in and the warranty's void or if you use launch control too many times the warranty is void.

 

[chriswt]

No offense, but there is a tad of naivety in that post.

Google earth is a dreadful product of this era but its tech isn't yet able to really spy real time. Blackboxes in cars can.

There was a bit of exajuration in my post about the bins, but its possible. Thats frightening, don't give the state the ability to monitor (i.e. resist these monitoring systems intruction vigerously), then you'll never worry about being snooped on in the first place.

I know google earth is a dreadful product in terms of quality but it was also a bit tongue in cheek!!!

Lets hope we can change the government for the better but DansSLK makes some good points and they're worth reading.

P.S I hope you didn't think I was trying to argue with your posts because I think you raise some good points and I value your opinion.

P.P.S I know we were given strict instructions not to comment about the victim in the original post but when you read something as horrific as that you find yourself getting angry with the system that gives the scum such a low sentance rather than a silly little back box!!

 

[Colin_b]

Yep i don't disagree with that hence my comments on making it accessible, erasable and switchable by the owner.

But the data stored in the car already i know is used without permission other than the signature given when the car is signed in and I've never done it with MB but i know BMW M worldwide and Lotus in the US keep an eye on the engine speeds and in BMW's case the transmission so exceed the specified engine speed in the break in and the warranty's void or if you use launch control too many times the warranty is void.

What information is stored, and can the owner of the car/data get at it for their own use?

 

[DansSlk]

If its capable of being stored it is, no different to fault codes so name your parameter.

While it is mostly your data i doubt many places will be willing to turn it over in case it comes back to bite them, the car does not discriminate between owners so its not always yours.

Of course if you have DAS you can get your hands on whatever you want.

 

[st4]

Yep i don't disagree with that hence my comments on making it accessible, erasable and switchable by the owner.

.

I wouldn't mind that so much if you could turn off the black box function, but if it was fitted in the first place it would allow the law in future years to make it mandatory as the technology is in place.

However if its not there, it keeps the state from using such technology to put into place the road pricing GPS based system that gets mentioned. Thats the concept I would like to get across. If we wish to keep things how they are, then we have to resist changes that could upset that.

Again as the data is the stored in the car and its owned by the car owner, thats not strictly true these days. A significant quantity of cars are financed through PCP and HP where the actual owner is a finance company, so strictly speaking the data recorded is theirs. Lorries and planes have black boxes, but they aren't the property of the trucker or pilot, and its there to monitor the owners property entrusted to the trucker/pilot.

Company cars could have black boxes I suppose on the basis that the company wants to ensure you don't use their property for your own benefit.

In a privately owned car this is not an issue.

Perhaps those who "own" their cars may have more of a leg to stand on the basis of this argument.