Slashdot Mirror
Rental Car + GPS = Speeding Ticket
Heem writes: "In an interesting use of GPS technology, it appears that ACME Rent-A-Car is fining customers that exceed the speed limit. Raises a lot of questions about accuracy and margin of error..." GPS is a double-edged sword. Ah, sonny, I remember the days when it was possible to go over 55 mph...
As if backing intellectual property theft weren't enough, now Slashdot seems to be condoning breaking public safety laws.
Ever heard the saying "Speed kills?" Remember that next time you barrel down a highway 30 over the posted limit "because that's the normal way." Remember that next time you complain about an officer of the law catching you and ticketing you for your flouting of the law. Remember that next time you read about a child killed by a speeder who just couldn't wait that much longer to get somewhere.
I think Slashdot's support of "the other side" has gone too far this time. A rental car agency takes an interest in ensuring their vehicles aren't used in traffic infractions, possibly negligent deaths...and the group thinks this is a bad thing?
I think it's about time Slashdot editors and readers took a moment to think about what they're advocating, and perhaps realize that the law isn't always wrong, and it isn't always wrong when a private interest tries to support that law.
The coyote, obviously.
Perhaps, Auckerman,
You miss the point. To me this arguement is less about getting away with speeding and more about privacy and the poor prescident that this kind of monitoring establishes.
Should the government or an organization be allowed to monitor your location simply because they own the means of transportation? If so, where does it end? Do they also have the right to monitor everything you say while in their vehicle?
It is important that people realize that there is more to this than merely getting away with speeding.
Dave
Imagine if you will a drive down an empty highway at 95 mph. The GPS picks up the fact that you are speeding and calls the police and alerts them to your location... You get pulled over and get a ticket...
Now imagine that your are driving 55 mph down the same empty highway and GPS is not functioning properly... The GPS still calls the police and you get a ticket... You are now going to have to prove that the GPS is not functioning properly.
This seems that there is a lot of potential for abuse with this...
Here are some other things to ponder...
Can you use a GPS as evidence in court as evidence that you are not speeding in rural areas where you are more likely to get caught in a speed trap?
How long until there are used in accident investigations and reconstruction?
-Just because you does not mean that you should...
Heh, We've got one down here that won't trigger on my truck. I remember I was wanting to make a right turn, and for some reason the intersection has a no turn on red sign (for no reason that I can see either, you can see about a mile down the road in every direction from the intersection, and the speed limit is only 35). Anyway, I ended up waiting through 3 cycles of the light before finally running right on the red. It's doubly frustrating that the police station is about half a block from that light.
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.
I read the internet for the articles.
>One concern is that the ticket is then given to
>the car owner and not the driver. If you lent
>out your car to a friend or your child,
If your child or friend is driving recklessly in your car with your permission, I would hope that you would take responsibility for the driver's actions or at least make the child/friend shoulder that responsibility.
>or your car was stolen, you would be liable for
>any tickets garnered by the driver of your car.
>It would then be up to you to prove that you
>didn't commit the crime. The burden of proof
>should be on the law enforcement officials, not
>you.
If your car is stolen, couldn't you or wouldn't you have already reported that to the police?
Also, traffic violations such as running a red light aren't crimes, they're misdemeanors.
>Also, there are some cases when running a red
>light is unavoidable...
Come on, this is also a circumstance which could reasonably be taken into account if you appeal the fine.
How about the car rental company's right to fine people for driving the s*** out of there cars?
If they can determine any problem with the vehicle when i return it, they're welcome to charge me whatever we agreed upon in the contract.
So? They're often below those posted in traffic as well.
Exactly. So what good is a system that can't determine what the current safe speed is on the road you're on? Either way, I would never rent from these guys. I have a feeling such a system will generate a lot of ill will towards that company and won't last long. People don't like to be monitored like that.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
If you don't like those terms, use a different car. Welcome to a free country where you can make choices.
Yeah, make your choices while you're still allowed to. Sooner or later these things will be mandatory. Free country indeed.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
That would give you a mighty high fine!
And sometimes when it gets a new sat or something strange happens I might "jump" on the map as to where my location is
You need a better GPS. My Garmin GPSMAP-195 never does that and I've driven over 12,000 miles with it, and flown another couple of thousand. Do you have one of the old ones that looked at each satellite in turn rather than in parallel?
--
The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
Kind of ironic this comment coming from somebody with the Slashdot id of "mp3car". Last time I looked, those car MP3 players required a lot more eyes-down time than monitoring your speedo with their fancy id3 tag displays and graphical eq and all that distracting crap.
.38 caliber "I'm too stupid to live" plan too.
If you can't watch the road and the speedo at the same time, I suggest you take your driver's license, go the nearest police station, and say "please take this away from me, I'm too stupid to drive".
While you're at it, you might enquire about their
--
The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
The only "disturbing development" is that people seem to think they can sign things and then use the claim that they didn't read them as a way to get out of it.
Agreed. Bad driving causes many more accidents than speeding. But since speeding is quantifiable, while bad driving is subjective, it's much easier to ticket the speeders than the bad drivers.
As long as the police have an easy and nearly incontestible method of measuring vehicle speed, then they will focus their efforts on speeding tickets rather than reckless/dangerous driving. I propose that these systems be banned, so that speeding would be less easily detected, and perhaps the police would start to spend more time ticketing the fools that are making the roads really dangerous.
<dream type="impossible">Let's make DWD ("Driving While Distracted") as serious an offense as DUI!
</dream>I've never had a cop ask me why I was speeding. They just ask to see my license, and then give me a ticket.
I've had a friend pull off the Ohio Turnpike, hand them his ticket, and be told "Your toll is $92, sir." $7 for toll, $85 for the speeding ticket. They're watching, all right. Best best is to pull off and get a burger at one of the oasis places along the way.
If you don't like the terms of their rental agreement go rent somewhere else.
He should have used a credit card instead of a debit card. He'd probably be in a much better position to dispute the charges. I think the real reason why the rental company is tracking speeding is to reduce the wear and tear on the car and thus lower their maintainance costs.
Are there devices to measure the forces on a car (and possibly every action)? For example since it's not their property, a driver is more likely to be more abusive with their rental. The rental company with such a device could calculate how much this abuse costs in extra wear and tear. Then they could stipulate in your contract in very small print "abuse this car and you'll pay us big bucks."
The thing is I'm sure car rental agencies already take into account their maintainence costs and are reflected in the rental price. In this scenario they don't pass the savings on to the consumer and slap the hands of anyone who doesn't treat their rental like grandma going for a Sunday drive.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Wrong. When you lease your car, the finance company might own the car, but when you buy and finance a car with payments (yes, the majority of car purchases), you own the car. The finance company gets a lien on the car along with a promise to pay a certain number of installments in exchange for a wad of cash with which you buy the car. The lien is a right to sell the car if you violate the loan agreement. The only way they have /any/ power over you is if you (a) stop paying or (b) violate another part of the agreement. And they wouldb't be that you can't remove cameras or other probes from your car and/or house.
The reason you can't have cameras in your house to make sure you don't smoke in bed is because it is your house. They just have the right to sell it, giving you anything left over from what you still owe them, if you miss a payment or violate the loan agreement. Ahh, the mortgage--a beautiful thing.....
Of course it's not OK. We would'nt allow a lease company, even if in a contract, to install cameras in your apartment to protect their 'assets' because it's wrong. So is this GPS deal.
Uhh, no. You don't seem to understand that a loan company can put whatever they want in a loan contract and, if you agree to it, it's enforceable unless it's "unconscionable." Meaning that once they give you the cash to buy the house, it's your house, but as a condition of the loan they can do whatever they want. You don't have to accept the loan.
As long as you agreed to it, and it's not unconscionable, you're damn right it's OK. A court would absolutely allow a reasonable monitoring device (like a security system for fire) to be installed in an apartment even if you're leasing it--the lease agreement would say that the landlord had a right to terminate the contract if you started a fire. There's absolutely nothing legally wrong with this company putting GPS in a rental car, as long as they put their intended use for it in the rental agreement.
You're being a paranoid, ignorant slashdotter like most, assuming that personal privacy trumps all laws. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.
No, we can't, not in this situation. You're being "fined" (it's not really a fine, you agreed to it) because you violated a provision of a contract. The contract stipulates damages for that violation. Double Jeopardy only refers to the same government prosecuting a person for a criminal act. And yes, that means that if you commit a crime that has both federal and state actions (bank robbery, maybe?) you can be found not guilty by the state but guilty by the feds, in two seperate trials. And it's not double jeopardy--that would only be if the Feds tried you twice.
My uncle has a country place
That no-one knows about
He says it used to be a farm
Before the Motor Laws
On Sundays I eluede the Eyes
And hop the turbine freight
To far outside the wire where my white-haired uncle waits...
:-(
. Because the law defines the penalties being assessed to the DRIVER of the car.
Actually, my understanding is that photo radar tickets are not assessed against the driver's driver's license...but just against the vehicle's owner, kinda like a parking ticket. Ohio is mulling the introduction of them (well sorta...some cities have put them in without permission of the state legislature) and it would go on like a parking ticket (if the owner wasn't driving, he's gotta track down the guy whom he lent the car to.) An affirmative defence is if the owner filed a stolen vehicle affidavit or showed a rental/leasing agreement with someone else.
In Ohio most of the red light running devices are in Toledo...which borders Michigan and Indiana. While Ohio has both front and rear license plates, Michigan and Indiana have only rear plates--so photographing the front of the vehicle is rather worthless if the car is from either MI or IN. Therefore they are set to photograph only from the back.
This would be a good candidate for RISKS. This month's issue of "GPS World" has an article from a research team in Adelaide (Oz), which is working on an urban tracking system for vehicles. Small problem: in urban areas, GPS coverage tends to be spotty. The article described how it was necessary to include inertial tracking hardware and accelerometers in the system, with all three components working together to figure out when the others were providing bad information. Otherwise, the GPS would tend to show things like the vehicle going from 0-120 km/hr in 10 meters.
Not bad for a minivan.
sPh
Has to be somewhere in the inside the coach part of the car or on the top of the vehicle in a relatively unobstructed place.
RF is blocked by metal of any kind- if they don't put this thing in some place that could be relatively easy for someone clever to find it's not going to work well- if at all.
Furthermore, since this uses Cell/PCS tech to communicate back to home, one could come up with a gadget that sourced about a microwatt or so of broadband RF power intended to be clipped to the antenna of the cell link that it uses. The little gadget's signal shouldn't be powerful enough to block most cell setups, but would swamp the targeted cell unit for the AirIQ system so that it'd be effectively deaf and dumb. (NOTE: I did not say that this was a good idea or that someone should set out to do this- it's just that it's very possible.)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
1) This is not law enforcement stuff. This is a rental company setting up a GPS/Speed Monitoring system tied to a central computer via mobile phone.
2) DMCA only applies to circumvention in the sense of copyright infringement. Blocking a signal isn't copyright infringement.
The most that this could be deemed is breach of contract- but I'll bet they can't/won't put language in there in that regard as hitting someone for the system never checking in because the mobile phone system was dead during the duration of the rental (which CAN happen) would cost them more than they lose in the form of a counter suit.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Someone even provided knowlege of the toys that you can use to do this. (Again, I am NOT advocating this! It's merely pointing out that someone clever could think of it and do it as easily as not.)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Speeding is defined in most jurisdictions as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the amount of violation of the regulation in question. You have to enter a plea of not guilty, guilty, no contest when dealing with a speeding ticket. Guilty is obvious. No contest means you don't agree with the citation but you're not going to bother with the presentation of a case regarding the violation. Not guilty results in a court case being heard by a judge. In Texas, if you're doing something like 40 or so over the speed limit, it's deemed a felony and they'll haul you off to the clink- same story for Oklahoma and quite a few other states.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Contracts are invalid if they make stipulations that are not legal (civil or criminal law) or require/involve illegal acts- PERIOD. It remains to be seen if the contract is legal- it matters little if it's their property if what they're stipulating can't be done by them.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
It's my understanding that legally they can't immediately charge his card for things not explicitly ennumerated up front on the transaction. Even though they claim that there will be a $150 per incident fine for excessive speed, since it's not ennumerated for each instance until they occur. They have to tell him up-front that they're going to charge him for the extra before EVER doing it.
Technically, the rental company can't charge for those- it's analogous to a Wal-Mart discovering that they undercharged you for something, taking your credit card number and charging the difference to your account.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Odd that I couldn't find a link denying toll operator tickets at snopes. Maybe I just didn't look well enough.
Vermifax
Vermifax
Logout
Vermifax
Vermifax
Logout
This argument against such devices is totally bogus. However it still does not mean they are a good idea.
Either way, I think it's a great idea, and a leap forward to the day when we can detect aggressive driving on the fly and deactivate the vehicle remotely.
There is a considerable difference between driving faster than a posted speed limit and aggressive driving.
Driving at the posted 55 (say) in pissing rain or 20feet visibility fog is theoretically legal, but most likely far more dangerous to all concerned than someone doing 70 on a clear day on the same road with good visibility.
I propose that organisations promoting these types of device for general use (not just for rentals), and similar radar/camera combos like we have in the UK should develop more useful detectors (stupid ass weaving between lanes without signalling cameras, stopping to pick up a lottery ticket in an already double-parked street cameras, and no-rear-view-mirrors cameras). Penalties should be education-oriented rather than entirely financial. That, or admit that it's really a fund-raiser, and not actually directly linked to road safety.
What the world needs is better, more alert drivers, aware of their surrounding and the limits of their vehicles, not another gadget to allow them to talk on their cellphone, or hold a conversation without worrying about speeding.
--
the telephone rings / problem between screen and chair / thoughts of homocide
"don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
I read some time ago that the police do look at these things on at least some sections of the French autoroute system. I wish I knew where though - just another unsubstantiated /. post :)
--
the telephone rings / problem between screen and chair / thoughts of homocide
"don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
Frightening. If my best course of action is to floor it and accelerate to avoid an accident, I can not and will not accept a system that prevents me from exceeding a set speed. Car companies are sick of frivolous "unbuckled child in front seat dies when drunk father drives wrong way down steep one-way hill" lawsuits now. Imagine the carnage when a "big brother device prevents accident avoidance" suit hits.
<rant tone='disgruntled'>
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Drivers' Exams in the United States suck. Pennsylvania's exam, at least in the late '80s, consisted of rote memorization of parking rules and high-beam etiquette. The road test was a trivial slalom, a three-point turn, and parallel parking. Not once was I taught about the traction circle, or the difference between front-, rear-, and all-wheel drive, especially at the handling limits. I learned more about driving from the manual that came with Gran Turismo than I did from PennDOT. Maybe if we quit entitling morons to propel 3500 lbs of steel and aluminum over 60 mph, the temptation to impose such Orwellian intrusions would go away.
</rant>
We're not scare-mongering/This is really happening - Radiohead
This sig intentionally left blank.
San Diego's red-light camera system is a good example of why letting Corporate America enforce laws might be a bad idea.
Last week, the San Diego Police Department turned off all red-light cameras in the the city, pending an investigation into the cameras' accuracy. Other cities in San Diego County may follow the city of San Diego's lead soon.
It was found out that the manufacturer and owner of all of the county's red-light cameras, Lockheed-Martin, had "Recalibrated" camera sensors at several of the busiest intersections in the city. This recalibration resulted in a substantial increase in the number of motorists ticketed, many from false positives resulting from the tweaked sensor settings. Many motorists were actually ticketed for going through green lights after being stopped for the red light.
It has also been discovered that many of the yellow lights at intersections are timed shorter than state law dictates, although Lockheed-Martin is not implicated in this problem.
The adjustments to the camera sensors were done without the permission, supervision, or even knowledge of the city of San Diego or its police department.
An independent investigative firm will be hired by the city to determine if any other cameras have been tampered with by Lockheed-Martin.
All motorists who received citations at these intersections will have their traffic cases dismissed (many retroactively) and their fines cancelled.
Because the cameras are actually owned and operated by Lockheed-Martin, who claim that the technology used is proprietary, and therefore secret, it is not possible for an accused driver to challenge a ticket in court on the basis of the camera systems being wrongly designed, calibrated or maintained. Unlike radar guns, there is no way to request documentation on the status of any given camera from the vendor or operator.
Several court cases regarding the legality of these cameras are pending. Some tickets have been dismissed because the courts found them to constitute a speed trap, which is a violation of California State law.
The city of San Diego recently added three new courtrooms just to handle red-light camera cases, which now are the number one traffic violation in San Diego County, and has so far this year, netted the city over one million dollars through fines. The fine for running a red light is $271.
Oh, by the way, Lockheed-Martin gets $70 off the top for each and every ticket issued by its cameras.
(And forget about doctoring your license plate to fool the camera. The operators use digital imaging software on PCs to enhance even the worst pictures. Masking of the plate has no useful effect. The only sure way to avoid getting caught, is to remove the car's front license plate.)
The problems are several:
Lockheed-Martin moved the sensors such that they flagged a car as going through a red light, when in fact, it had actually stopped at the intersection. Consider how many more cars will be photographed if the virtual intersection is widened in one or both directions by a couple of feet.
There is no accountability as to the method(s) used to determine whether a car had gone through an intersection or not. A photo, by itself is not sufficient. These are not videos, these are cropped still pictures showing a motionless car at the time it crossed an unspecified and unknown boundary. People have been ticketed while stopped at a red light. The sensors said they ran the red light, when in fact they had not.
There is no picture of the traffic signal. The cameras are actually pointing down so as to catch both the license plate and driver's face of the offending vehicle. The sensors measure the position of the car relative to the timing of the signal. The placement of the sensors is critical to accurate measurement of the cars' position relative to the state of the traffic light.
There is a reason that limit lines are painted at controlled intersections. A motorist has a reasonable expectation that the camera's virtual limit lines are in the same plane as their painted counterparts. Also, in California, it is legal to make a right turn against a red light (after stopping first). There is no means of knowing whether the camera takes this into consideration.
These are closed systems. They are not open to inspection, validation or critique by third parties, or even by the city. They can be as arbitrary in their measurements as the vendor can get away with. In the case of San Diego, Lockheed-Martin was caught.
Lockheed-Martin has no business getting a bounty on every motorist who runs a red light. That is a clear a flagrant conflict of interest. Imagine what kind of mess we will be in when electronic voting takes place if such closed proprietary systems are implemented by corporations with a vested interest in the outcome of the final tally.
Don't kid yourself. Photographs can be and are often manipulated to lie. We have whole entertainment and marketing industries built around this very fact. And they make a LOT of money.
All other things aside, people seem to be missing the fact that these things are not realtime.. There is no big board back at Acme with your locatrion on it.. The download it all out after you get back.. So basically, you're agreeing to let them know where you've taken their van, and how fast it was going..
This is exactly the same stuff semi drivers have had for years..
Well, your interpretation could be correct, however I would imagine that by oncoming truck, he meant something like looking out a side window and seeing a truck barreling down at you at a perpendicular angle and you would have to speed up to get out of the way.
GPS is accurate enough. I've actually found that it's more accurate than the speedometer in my car at high speeds.
Only on slashdot can a posting be rated "Score -1, Insightful".
Screw the speeding ding which by the way is totally arbitrary. Why do they collect for this and how did they arrive at this figure?
The big problem is that they went and paid themselves with his money w/o asking him.
and there is no set limit over the posted it is called by the officer at a safe amount above the posted given traffic and weather conditions. You can be a ticket for driving the limit if conditions warrant slower usage.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Lets just look at the bottom line. Could the device save lives, reduce the risk of stolen and abandoned cars, Maybe. However, what they really want to do is collect extra fees. I wonder if the state's police angency receives any proceeds from ACME?
So, can anyone tell me whether the US police (california even) can send you a speeding ticket through the post? And when this is legal?
I mean in the UK we have speed/radar cameras which clock you, take a photo of your license plate then you get a ticket in the mail. On the other hand, if you encounter a police car and they don't actually pull you over then you're not going to get a ticket.
I mean, it would seem in these days that the police can just take down you details and mail you a ticket - that's what information society is bringing us.
What kind of a moron would rent a car from ACME when they have this kind of policy in place?
If you stole the car, then I did not lend it to you, and I am not responsible for what you do.
By your standards, I shouldn't be held accountable if I lend my car to someone who isn't licensed and has never actually driven a car. Indeedy, you figure I shouldn't be held accountable even if I lend the car to someone who has had their license impounded for repeated drunk driving offenses!
There are plenty of examples of ownership resulting in liability. If you own a swimming pool, but don't put up a fence, you're liable should some nosepicker jump in and drown. If you own a gun, lend it out to a friend to kill his wife, you're going to be held partially at fault. If you help a friend smuggle dope across the border, you're going to be in trouble, even though you weren't driving the car.
Now, finally, note that the original discussion is all around people who speed.
If you lend the car out to someone who speeds, and photo radar nabs him, then the ticket is assigned to the owner of the car. Who pays -- you or your friend -- is something you're gonna have to figure out for between yourselves.
Chances are, he'll pay, and you won't lend it out to him again.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Only because the law doesn't have the balls to make the owner of the car (the insurer of the car) liable for the car when he willingly lends it out.
My opinion is that if you're enough of a jackass to lend your car to someone that drives drunk, speeds, is untrained, has no license, whatever -- well, then, you deserve to be held as an accomplice when that vehicle is used to break the law.
Lending the car out is a *choice* and if you don't want to be liable for other drivers, then don't lend the damn thing out.
(Note that we're already partially there: if you lend it out and it gets wrecked, the insurance company is going to raise *your* rates.)
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
I believe all good trucking companies are using the GPS-equipped trucks to ensure that their drivers are complying with the law: that they aren't speeding excessively, that they are taking rest-breaks regularly, that they are checking brakes before big hills, and that they are on-route and not picking up hitchhikers.
This reduces the company's costs: maintenance and insurance costs are reduced, and they can reliably predict delivery times.
Why else would they bother with the GPS? It'd be a waste of investment otherwise.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Sure, there'd be a revolt...
...but can you imagine how much safer it would be to drive? The reduction in insurance costs would be pretty damn dramatic, too.
If only someone had the balls to implement something like this, *plus* mandatory driver training and regular re-testing.
My god! It'd damn near put hospitals and morgues out of business!
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
So what? Since when has ignorance been any sort of acceptable excuse?
By your thinking, I should be able to stop paying my mortgage, and yet retain the house, because I didn't read the contract, and therefore it doesn't apply to me.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
If the major rental agencies ever come to realize that this will increase their bottom-line profitability, by reducing their insurance rates, car-theft rates, and accident rates, you can be damn sure they will immplement it.
And all you fruggin whiners who figure you've got some sort of G.D. right to speed will be screwed to the wall. And thank goodness, too.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
As speed doubles, impact force quadruples.
An impact of 75 vs 55, is an impact with nearly twice the energy.
Speed is quite obviously a major factor in the severity of an accident.
An impact where both drivers are speeding at 75 will have *seven* times the energy of a single-vehicle accident at 55. And that'd have to be a single vehicle hitting an immovable object, not a fencepost.
Of course speeding isn't the (common) *cause* of accidents. But it's an *extremely significant* factor in their outcome.
And the fact is that most of the arseholes who are speeding are just plain incompetent drivers. When they're forced to maintain pace with traffic, they put everyone at less risk, because they're not weaving in and out of traffic, nor passing.
That's the whole point: to minimize the chances of them fucking up, and to minimize the destruction when they do.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Oh, hey, and speaking of blind spots:
You can minimize your blind spots, and possibly even eliminate them, by correctly adjusting your mirrors.
Place your head against the drivers' side window, and adjust the left mirror to where it just barely doesn't show your car at all. Repeat for the right mirror, with your head positioned toward the middle of the car (ie. above the center console/parking brake).
True, you can't see your car in the mirrors any more. But, then, that's okay: you know where your car is. Give it a week or two, and it won't seem so unnerving.
You'll see a *lot* more of the traffic on either side of you, and your rearview covers the traffic behind you.
In some cars, you will have *no* blind spots.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Kinetic Energy = (1/2)*(mass)*(velocity)^2
The mass can be disregarded, as it's constant in this case (the car is not going to become appreciably lighter as it goes faster).
That leaves velocity-squared. Double the speed equals four times the damage when that car collides with something.
You're free to quibble about my casual use of "impact force," but I'm not much interested in arguing cheezy-ass semantics. The original point still stands: 75kmh is nearly *twice* the collision of 55kmh, even though the speed is less than half-again as fast.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
I have noticed the same thing and confirm it by maintaining a constant speed over a fixed number of miles, get a time for the distance, and comparing speeds to the speed = distance/time. The GPS is usually very close to the calculated speed. Much closer than the car's speedometer.
:)
And, Yes... I have had to drive many miles in a car without any sort of audio entertainment.
...this bozo got caught speeding, and doesnt like it. I feel no sympathy for him, same as the idiots that run through a tollbooth without paying and whine when a camera has a photo of their plate. He gambled, and he lost. Get over it.
In Massachusetts we use a version of the EZ-Pass system called FastLane. You pass through the sensors on entry and then again at the normal tollbooths and it debits your account. Both transactions have a timestamp and the distance between them is fixed so, doing the math means they can get an average speed on your trip. I've been wondering when they'll catch on to my commute being shorter than expected.
You'd rather have a government, backed by armed police and a court system you are forced to pay for go after you, than a single private company?
That's nonsensical. All you have to do now is to not rent from Acme. They will be out of business soon anyway. Or they'll change their policy to save themselves from losing customers.
With the government, they confiscate your money, and the IRS will send you to jail if you object.
Now which is worse?
What inevitably happens? Going a little overboard, aren't we?
While I'm sure a rational case can be made for maintaining or strengthening the drunk-driving laws, or how a slippery-slope argument is not particularly persuasive, you're obviously not going to bother making it. It's so much easier to just brand someone as "paranoid" than it is to actually counter their position, isn't it? That way, you don't have to worry about any of that bullshit like reason, logic, or facts. How convenient.
Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
The speed tracking on most GPS units is extremely accurate, and with modern units that usually try to maintain "contact" (of course the contact is one way with the GPS only receiving) with 12 satellites at once it'd be extremely rare under all but the worse situation that it would suddenly "snap" you into a new position (and of course unless you're doing a rally it's easy to filter out such errant info). My little handheld amateur Garmin has a speed accuracy of .2 MPH, and in practical terms I found that it is REMARKABLY accurate (albeit lagged from my current speed by about .5s), whether in a canoe, on foot, or in a car. Indeed I discovered that both my cars overstate the speed by ~5KPH at 100KPH which makes me wonder if this is a way major car manufacturers chop 5% off the warranty secretly (or overcharge for excess KM on leases).
GPS is hardly that unproven of a technology: Aircraft can now legally land (if I recall correctly) based upon GPS information of where the runway is supposed to be related to where the aircraft thinks it is (and this is the civilian signal). GPS is a very, very reliable system. If WW3 kicked up they might shut it down, but the military isn't going to just for the heck of it.
When calculating velocity, 15ft will make a TREMENDOUS difference.
Sure it does if you take two single samples a short time apart (say when the person has travelled 30 ft) it could hypothetically make an inaccuracy of up to 100%. However when you are taking 100s of samples at a quickly duration you can quickly filter the errant data. As I mentioned in another post my GPS has a lag from my speed of about 0.5s and the reason is obviously because it amasses enough samples and then filters out the slight discrepencies to come up with the average speed for the prior period, etc. It's not like the speed is jumping up and down, but rather it smoothly transitions based on my changes. If I use it while in a car I can see the car holding speed, gaining a KPH or two, etc. i.e. This is something that you have to experience to truly gain faith in it.
Again I can walk down the street and it shows my walking speed pretty much precisely, and given that give or take 15ft will make a much bigger difference to someone going 2.5KPH I'm prone to believing it's quite accurate for someone going 100KPH.
Let me put it this way: When I'm standing still it says 0 KPH. When I walk at a regular pace it says 2.5KPH. When I walk slowly it says 1.2KPH. If it is accurate to show me precisely when I slowed down and sped up while walking, then this $200 unit can certainly accurately gauge the speed at 100 KPH (i.e. if the position is good enough to measure such minute speeds, it's obviously good enough to measure 100 KPH).
Again standard deviation can easily correct for offset errors (that is trivial statistics) and on anything but the most moronic device is not a factor unless you're aiming cruise missiles.
I take issue with comparing going over the speed limit to running red lights: While going over the speed limit has only mildly been correlated with accidents (though the British government, in its campaign to reduce car speeds, brought up some bogus stats to try to make the case for that), going through red lights is absolutely dangerous and is the result of many injuries and deaths. Here in the greater Toronto area (GTA) there has been a huge push to install red-light cameras and there is little or no public opposition (it's very unlike a GPS planted in your car anyways: Your own property is not giving you up, but rather an external unit is). Quite contrary though there was a huge public outroar about a previous initiative that saw them parking radar vans on the side of highways and racking up hundreds of fines for people marginally over the speed limit.
Just before the USDOT lifted the limits on interstate speeds, results from a study on traffic accidents and fatalities revealed that the likelihood of being in an accident correlated with only one number - the amount of time spent driving.
Speed, geography, road type, age, sex none of that correlated well with increased accident rates. The only thing that correlated strongly was time on the road.
Now, fatalities on the other hand, are different. Fatality rates do correlate with speed, up to a certain point. Once you get above 60, they start to level off.
So, the logical conclusion is, if you're going to drive freeway speeds, then you might as well drive over the limit and get there sooner!
I can see the fnords!
They could make it work if they wanted to. Heck, in Boulder, CO, they have sensors that work for bicycles.
I can see the fnords!
If it's just a matter of people driving the cars too fast, then the rental company should install speed throttlers to ensure the car won't go over a certain top speed.
I dunno. It all seems quite stupid to me.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
The system had to be redone so the passenger's face wouldn't show-up, because it seems a lot of husbands getting back home would be greeted with an angry wive brandishing the speeding ticket with photo, and shouting "who was that woman with you"????
--
of course IANAL, but if you have knowlege that a crime is committed and don't report it to the authorities, doesn't that make you an accessory? Especially if you provided the tool that made the crime possible?
Moreover, if you begin to charge the transgressor money as a result of your special knowelege of the crime, could that constitute blackmail?
Just wondering,
W
-------------------
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
hahahaha. so true. GPS can easily give wild readings when there is signal loss. I was shocked to see that the gps speeding system seemed to be automatically linked to his checking account because the funds had been withdrawn before he even reached his destination! I can see the safty reasons for tracking speed - the result should be a warning to the driver and a record of the speeding in the customer record. The result would be something along the lines of making the next rental more expensive.
Have you ever driven in a 30 mph zone in England? ;> .. come to that, ever driven in england? :)
:) - I'm thinking of Leicester here...
You're lucky to have a two-lane road (i.e. one lane one way, one the other), after all the parked cars... normally it's down to 1 in side streets (yea, you have to take turns)
And with all the traffic I doubt you'd be able to accelerate anywhere.. let alone maneuver out of the way of anything.
--
Delphis
Delphis
Anyway, I ended up waiting through 3 cycles of the light before finally running right on the red
.. How strange.
And the cycle of the light did not have a green for the road you were on?
--
Delphis
Delphis
We'll just lots of lurching drivers with worn out brake pads who speed, get a 'warning' from the GPS thingy that's about to rag on them, then slow down.
.. there time is money and they want to make sure you're not off lazing around in the truck stops, plus they have an image to protect hence the speeding tracking. But for personal motoring it's going too far imho.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
I still don't like the idea of being spied upon. If you're an employee for a trucking company, I can see it
--
Delphis
Delphis
shrug
Guess I'll have goto National instead of ACME next time I need to rent
signal, noise, to me it's all the same.
Well, I really like their rapid shipping.
signal, noise, to me it's all the same.
>I'd move except that Montana is possibly the world's most boring region.
BTW, Montana most certainly DOES have speed limits.
I just returned from a trip to Lewistown (central Montana), and every highway we travelled on (from interstates down to rural two-laners) had a clearly posted speed limit (granted, usually the interstates were 75, and the small two-lane highways were still 55 or more).
-LjM
The software can tell the difference between
random GPS errs and continuous speeding.
No need to make up sophmoric excuses for bad
behavior.
Some rental locations, particluarly big urban
centers with high accident and default problems
have experimented with driving record and credit
rating denials of service. A number of people
have been peeved to fly into an airport and
find their rental denied because they had more
than one moving violation. The rental companies
wont tell you in advance because it costs several
dollars to run these searches and many reservations
are vapor. They feel it is worth irritating a
few percent of their customers rather than lose
thousands on high risks.
You only THINK you don't speed. Can you prove it through the entire rental duration? As far as ACME is concerned you speed if the GPS system indicates that you drove their vehicle past the limit they set themselves.
:)?
This of course leads to possible charges even if you conscientiously (sp?) keep your speed within the posted limits:
1. As other have stated problems with GPS satellite tracking might exagerate your speed.
2. Are they really setting a reasonable limit? What if someone set the speed limit to 35mph?
3. What if you rent a vehicle with a faulty GPS system (perhaps because it's running WinCE
4. What if the rental car was stolen and taken for a joy ride? As in the case stated in the article, your ATM will be immediately depleted.
5. In some areas if you drive significantly slower than the prevailing traffic you can be cited. Will ACME introduce charges for such behavior in the future? What about rolling stops at stop signs? The wrong way on one way streets? Stopping by the sidewalk at the red light district? Trespassing on Area 51? Stopping near a known crack house? Lovers' Lane? The list is endless...
When renting with most agencies you can do a walk-around inspection of the vehicle prior to accepting it to ensure that you don't get charged for pre-existing damage. Can you do the same with the GPS system?
Will they let you view the prior history of the car so that you can choose the ones that have never been driven past 90mph? If they claim that car has only been rented to little old ladies during Sundays will they put it in writing?
Never attribute to stupidity what can be construed as a monopoly preservation tactic.
That was something like 5 years ago. We're still doing 65 and over. No more fatalities than usual. You know what that means?
Welcome to the NJ Turnpike, buckle up and ignore the speed limit as usual.
--
talking on a cell phone while driving *should* be illegal.
Really? I read recently that TEN TIMES as many accidents are caused by drivers being distracted by adjusting the RADIO than are caused by drivers distracted by cell phones. Shouldn't we ban car radios first, then?
Of course, even MORE people people were distracted by "something outside of the car" than the radio. Face it, distracted drivers are dangerous, no matter what the distraction. But don't single out cell phones to blame when they're only implicated in about 1% of accidents. Just because you can see the cell phone in the driver's hand doesn't mean you know he's distracted. One could easily be more distracted by a conversation with a passenger. Shall we ban passengers in all cars as well?
This is ridiculous.
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
Your sounding like a Brit there. "You never know then the IRA will strike again!!! Only cameras will allow us police to protect you!!"
pan
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
nope - Montana's highway fatality rate DOUBLED after reimposing speed limits. hhttp://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm
Not speeding is risky, too, especially on wide-open freeways designed to be travelled at 75 mph in cars which didn't handle as well as cars do today. I don't get too incensed about red-light monitors, but the speed laws in most of the US are incredibly irrational, and designed to raise revenue or facilitate police harrassment. If the speed limit on California freeways defaulted to 90, with lower speed limits (like 70 to 85) on the older ones with tighter turns, etc., I could respect them; but right now, the only thing which keeps me at the speed limit on a freeway is heavy traffic.
Better yet, fasten the receiver onto the track of the garage door. It will look like you make a lot of short trips back and forth across your garage :)
But seriously, if GPS receivers are ever required in cars, there will be laws against removing them, or more specifically against driving without one installed. Just like emissions control devices, the government could easily make GPS required equipment for operating an automobile on public roads.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
My favorite: $50 added to the fine because it was a work zone. I would be a lot more understanding if it hadn't been 1:00 AM on a deserted highway in the middle of Indiana - trust me, there were no road crews out there for me to hit. If they'd been working, I'd have been happy to pay the extra $50, except that the sight of Indiana road crews actually working (and at night to boot) might have killed me first.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Or (personal best) when someone passes you on the raised median in the center of the road at a much greater speed than you were driving or the road was rated for. I prayed for part of a sign or a rock for them to run over, but no joy :(
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
I would totally pay to be able to do that to other drivers. Unfortunately, the last people to opt in would be the ones that need it the most...
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Can you jam GPS? Could you bring along a pocket-sized low power transmitter that would prevent them from getting any info or false info (I never went above 20!)?
but on my bike, if I'm going 80, (not that I would ;), I can stop my 450 pound (200kg) bike in the same distance as that 4000lb (1800kg) SUV/boat when it's doing 50.
And STOPPING distance is really the number that we care about when we set speed limits.
The technical term for a debit card is "dumbass card". The risks of using these cards is so vast is isn't even funny. I can't believe that they are even legal. It's is exactly as bad as including a book of blank pre-signed checks with every payment you make.
If he had used a credit card, he could have just refused to pay. Then, it would be ACME that has to go to court and justify the $450.00. But, since he used a debit card he is probably SOL. Even if he gets his $450 back, he'll have to give it to his lawyer. Also, notice that it says his account was "drained". It's quite possible that ACME just took as much money as it could. If he had had $4500 in his account, they probably would be claiming that they clocked him speeding 30 times instead of three.
"Yes, your honor. He was speeding at 4:13, again at 4:17-4:18, 4:20-4:23, etc. etc. It's all here in the logs."
Bah. I have no sympathy for the rental company, and hope the guy gets his money back. But, he is a dope for using a debit card.
No, they are not the same thing at all. Getting a bill for $450 dollars is not the same thing as having all the money taken out of your checking account without your knowledge or consent. I think what you mean is that, in theory, they are the same. In fact, they are not the same at all. In one case, you are in the very strong barganing position of requiring the other party to sue you if they want to force you to give up the money. In the other case, you are in the very weak position of being A) broke, and B) having to convince either them or your bank to give the money back.
If you still are not convinced, compare these two scenarios:
1) I send you a bogus bill for $500 dollars.
2) I steal $500 dollars in cash from you.
If you think these are the same, you live in a fantasy land. Debit cards are just a way for Visa et al. to get the benefit of credit cards (a tax on all purchases) without any of the risk (fraudulent use and bad debt.) They are not for the consumers benefit at all.
--Xantho
And... reliable?
So, the US military can at any time decide it's time to switch the GPS to low-accuracy, making all GPS's jump around on the map, and suddenly all rental car drivers get charged en masse?
I'd say about as reliable as IIS, it works... until the next time it doesn't...
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
I agree. Unfortunately, *every* time I tell a police officer this, I get slapped with a ticket.
Really. What ELSE do you say to the cop? I just get handed a ticket if I get pulled over, no hitting involved.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
That's the theory on the Indiana toll-way, right? You enter the system at a known point in space and time, and exit at another such point, and it is simple math to figure out if you've been speeding. What due process would be necessary?
Well, apparently, you only have to fool the majority of people for a little while.
Well... if there were a GPS receiver inside MY car when I bought it... I would take my car home, park it in the garage, take the reciever out, and position it on the ceiling of the garage ~6 feet higher than it would have been while it was in the car.
I hope they don't keep track of my mileage with it because while my car is being driven, the gps transmitter will not.
-S
Scott Ruttencutter
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
GPS used to have a 'feature' called select availability which could mess up your location readings by miles in some cases. In 2000 Mr. Clinton signed a bill that got rid of that 'feature' and enabled all of us to use our GPS devices with a great amount of stability.
I use my gps a lot when I go on Geocaching excursions. I have noticed that when traveling long distances my location jumps a lot on the screen. Sometimes my car manages to lose a signal and then, BANG, I'm going 120 when my GPS is trying to catch back up with where my car really is.
I don't understand how any company can reasonably believe that they can accurately track a persons SPEED with GPS. The locations are typically accurate to a matter of feet. Sometimes the accuracy can get up to a matter of yards or miles. It all depends on the terrain you are in (Trees, etc), as well as how many of those GOVERNMENT OWNED satellites are within sight range of your GPS.
Somehow I doubt that this car rental agency has their own ring of satellites up in orbit that have an accuracy of mere inches. Furthermore, if this system does exist, it would have to be not only accurate but absolutely fool proof. There could be no error at all in any measurements.
If they had that, they would quickly be out of the car rental business and have a lot of people knocking on their door for service.
-S
Scott Ruttencutter
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
I sure as hell won't rent from them.
Then you'd get a ticket or even arrested for tamering with law enforcment equipment. Or worse yet, get busted under the DCMA for circumventing encrypted copyrighted data (since I'm sure they've copyrighted the GPS streams from the satalites..)
_______
2B1ASK1
Actually, the speed limiter on most cars because of the rating on the tires. If you go over the tire's rated speed, all sort of bad things can happen.
-- Bryan
Ban Arby's!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
It's the sudden deceleration.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
The dumbasses who either don't read the rental agreements, are to stupid enough to understand them, or fall for the "That's just standard rental agrement stuff, just sign at the bottom."
As far as I'm concerned they can go ahead with their speed tracking policy via GPS. Once the public get's hold of that information the only time they'll rent a car is if all the other agencies are flat out of available vehicles. Commercial Darwinism will rid the world of companies like this.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
So... does it strike anybody else as silly that they need a GPS to do this? Seems like technology overkill to me. My car has already has a device that indicates how fast I'm going. It's called a speedometer.
Most sigs are dumb. This is one of them.
Even if it looked like you, because picture alone is not positive ID in most states. That is why we have a thing called a drivers license and state ID cards. A picture alone is not positive ID, because you wouldn't be able to prove if it was you, your brother, your twin.
How is a driver's license anything other than a picture ID? Why couldn't my twin brother get away with using my driver's license?
cpeterso
More like electronically stunted.
In fact, most cars have internal speed limits. Many new cars have speed limits in the area of 110 to 120 MPH.
Case in point: Dodge Intrepid comes with a 3L V6, more than enough horsepower to go about 135. But you'll never know, their speed is electronically limited to 117 mph.
Then, there are new sports cars. Many do not have any form of speed limits; the rest are limited to 155 mph. 155? That's twice the highest National Highway speed limit. It would be just as easy for the manufacturer to place this at 90, or 75 mph.
No, the government needs speeding tickets. That is a major cash cow for local and state governments everywhere. They have Excessive Speed Quotas to meet their budgets.
Exceeding the speed limit is not always illegal either. You may temporarily exceed the posted limit only while passing a slow moving vehicle. I was pulled over doing 93 in a 55 mph zone. I did not recieve a ticket. I was pulled over and given a warning.
These situations are at the discretion of the officer. He understood my situation. Passing a weaving triple trailer with over 300 hp.
digitalunity
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
I've taken my Toyota Supra past 160 mph a couple of times. Definitely not suggested. I did this on I84. If you don't know where this is, it's long valey running ajacent to the Columbia River. Very *nice*, long and mostly straight.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
No, I'm sorry. That's not good enough.
Ever rented a car? They explain each detail to you, and ask for initials in several spots to indicate that they've explained the contract to you, including what happens when you encounter photo-radar (if it's in your jurisdiction), what happens when you get tickets, etc...
Suddenly adding a line to the contract about speed monitoring by gps and not TELLING anyone is tantamount to fraud.
Besides, for what reason do they collect monetary damages for this?
Yes. The gas thing is standard. Any time I rent a car, from Hertz, or Budget, they explained this to me very clearly, intial here to indicate that you understand that if you do not fill the car up before bringing it back, we chareg $3.50/gallon or whatever. It was *clearly and explicitly explained to me*
I've never had my rate changed, sorry. I get it very clearly from them what it will cost in the end. The troubles you have with this are no different than troubles at any other computer-drive powerless-clerk type agency.
I see a world of difference between this and mandatory speeding checks. This is not about speed limits; it is about a contractual limit beyond which you are not supposed to drive the car. I agree it's stupid, and I wouldn't rent from them, however...
Again, this isn't about posted speed limits, this is about the company saying 'you are not to drive this car faster than 55mph, or we'll fine you each time'.
As for your 'blind' ticket... what's that? Like photo-radar? Unfortunately.... the speed limit is still the speed limit pal. Yes, going with the flow can be used as a defense, but I doubt you were in a huge pack of cars when this happened. And if you were saving a life? You were *still* speeding.
I have so little sympathy for photo-radar whiners; no, I don't like photo radar, but I've seen so many people grumble about how it's 'wrong' while they speed to work at 20kph over the posted limit. Whee... it's like 'Goddamn bank security cameras! They interefere with my robbing the place!'
From the AirIQ website:
There are inherent limitations to the components of the technology. The system utilizes wireless technology (cellular) to communicate to and from the vehicle. Therefore, the vehicle must be within cellular coverage to communicate. Cellular covers approx. 95% of populated North America. Additionally, the GPS receiver must have a direct line of sight with the satellites to provide accurate location information.
------
IanO
------
Objects in Mirror are Losing!
Some GPS systems have a gyro to try to guestimate what the car is doing when GPS is unavailable (such as in a tunnel).
:)
You could always customize it to contact you when it senses: stationary car + gyro movement
------
IanO
------
Objects in Mirror are Losing!
So just use the Ronald Reagan defense when asked that sort of question.
Officer: "Were you driving your vehicle at 8:52 AM on April 19, 2001?"
You: "I don't remember."
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
AFAIK, that's perfectly legal. The laws in all the states I know of make an exception for people running red lights when it is apparent that the light is malfunctioning. I think the rule is that if the light stays red for more than two minutes, you can treat the light as a stop sign and go after looking to make sure the way is clear.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
In some small towns (the ones that make traffic fines a main revenue source,) the lights going through the main drag would be synchronized and timed so they change in sequence, ostensibly for giving drivers a nice series of greens. Then they would set the yellow durations to 5 seconds on all the lights, except the last one, which would have a 2 second yellow duration. Of course, a cop would be waiting to nail the person who made it through all the 5 second yellows, but didn't make that last yellow.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
That reminds me of a friend of mine who got unjustly fired by Blockbuster. How did he get back at them? Some people collect stamps or antique cars or computers. My friend collects Blockbuster late-fees. He rents from a Blockbuster and deliberately keeps the movie late a few days (or months.) He keeps doing this until the Blockbuster stops allowing him to rent. He then moves on to another Blockbuster doing the same thing (the various stores don't share their late fee lists.) He won't pay the late fees until the collection agencies call and threaten to break his kneecaps. So far he's accumulated hundreds of dollars of late fees, hasn't paid a cent of them yet, and is working hard on increasing his collection. :)
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
The way ACME set the box up, when they do a remote shutdown of a vehicle, the box lets the driver keep driving until he parks & shuts off the ignition. Then it won't start up again.
Talk about Big Brother. I don't care what justification a company has about using this kind of technology. I deeply resent the idea of having every move of mine monitored. As long as I return the car in the same condition as it was before I rented it, where I drive or how fast I go is none of their damn business.
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
I can't wait until this comes to Australia - having just returned from a holiday in the Northern Territory where the open road is unrestricted, I spent several hours at a time sitting on 180 km/h. Let's see their system cope with that!
[later]
Oh damn... should have read the fine print in the rental contract, I suppose.
"In person, WAP'ed up and making your life a misery!" BOFH, 2003
If you have a series of positions measured at discrete times, it's very very easy to get velocity. V=ds/dt where s is position and t is time. Take your change in s (your last two position fixes) and the time interval of the measurements, divide, and you've got an excellent approximation of your instantaneous velocity.
Making a microprocessor do this is trivial. Sending that number over a radio is also trivial. Your thought that the costs of implementing such a system would be prohibitive is incorrect, since the article says that it HAS been implemented, and rather widely.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I think a safe alternative would be handsfree kits. I know when I don't use a kit, I have a hard time swinging my head all the way around to see my blind spots.
So, I usually turn my cell phone OFF in the car. No point in smoking a cigarette, drinking a coke, and trying to shift and drive while talking on the cell phone.
(yup, it's funny, laugh...)
Karnal
What I have thought would be an interesting use of FastLane data is real-time traffic monitoring. Assuming that FastLane users are a representative sample of all drivers (which may or may not be the case), a system like MapQuest could know what the true current average and dev. speeds were on major roads and give predictions accordingly, etc... There are dozens of good ways the data could be used.
--Ben
Even without EZ-Pass or FastLane, the ticket you get when you enter a toll road is time-stamped so the same issues exist with the ``old way''
--Ben
"Someday we'll be able to just switch off those retarded SUV drivers on the freeway with the push of a button!"
If more than X people in a certain time period type in your plate number to some little keypad, then your car is alerted that it has recieved a "Time Out". You have 5 minutes to pull over and turn your car off. After giving you a few minutes to think about what a naughty boy you've been (or load an AK), you can start driving again. You could get the system sponsored by "Survivor". It would be huge.
-B
not only are they looking at that stuff bet there was an article in the paper only today about a solar powered speed camera in a cats eye! The device will also function as a brighter cats eye that changes color with the road conditions.
The device was very clever, using radar to sense speed then taking two digital pictures that are transfered out via a wireless network for remote processing. The divice is admissable in court and since the police are getting the money from fines now we will probabally start to see them everywhere.
-- "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read."
The other question one has to ask is when this AirIQ is operational? Does is apply all the time or only when the key is in the ignition? Perhaps the driver is having the vehicle towed or it may be on a transport truck? Who knows what all the reasons may be that the vehicle was traveling faster than the rental agencies top speed.
At that point I don't see how the individual who rented the car can be liable for how fast the car was traveling.
Seriously... how often do you see a cop pull over a tow truck and then write up a ticket for the owner of the car that's being towed! Give me a break.
I would love to see the condition where it was in the cargo hold of a plane being flown somwhere and it was traveling at VERY excessive speeds. Imagine what that would look like to the system operators! :)
I'm sure others can come up with even more examples where this setup could be fooled into giving out tickets when there is no just cause to be doing so.
Just a few thoughts to chew over...
A big piece of aluminum foil wrapped over the GPS unit. Problem solved. Big Brother has been been 'foiled' again.... :)
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
ROTFLMAO...
.2 mph must either have cost you around $AU10,000 (which equates to around $US20,000), or it is bullshitting you. Handheld GPS units get at best 5 m accuracies, and without initialisation, maintaining satellite lock, and post computation, there is not many chances you'll go better.
I spent the better part of six months last year studying ways to improve the accuracy of systems such as this. Anything that tells you have a speed accuracy of
To improve the situation you need to add firstly a unit connected to the speedometer (or more likely the wheel hubs to measure distance, and don't forget to factor in tyre pressures changing into the errors involved here), then we also need to add a gyrometer, best bet here is a fibre optic gyro, and based on this and the use of a Kalman filter, your best bet would be around 2m. Then, factoring in loss of satellite lock, antenna orientation, signals bouncing off buildings, not maintaining 12 satellites (which you would be lucky to get full stop) as well as things such as urban tunnels, and the figure goes even lower. The main thing though is that maintaing lock on twelve satellites would be extremely marginal at best (lots below 15 degrees above the horizon, which adds to distort signals).....
Red Light cameras are very popular in the UK, most intersections in London have red light cameras. There are also bus lane cameras (UK doesn't have car pool lanes yet).
When I moved to California I was shocked to see the number of people who jump red lights (and I'm not talking about right turn on red - these are mainly left over busy intersections) and I quickly realised it is because of the lack or red light cameras.
I understand that some states in the US belive these aren't legal - I don't understand why that can be the case you were clearly breaking the law and in many cases intentionally doing it. What is unconstitutional about getting caught by a device rather than a policeman ?
texas has that law, double the fine if it's a work zone, but i've noticed that recently they've been adding a sign to the bottom of the warnings that says "when work crews are present".
this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
Suddenly your concentration is broken when your car cheerily announces, "You've got a ticket!" It then thoughtfully reads it aloud for you.
"Dear driver. The SafeDriver(tm) system has noted that you're traveling at 83.2mph. Please note that the speed limit at your current location is 45mph. For your convenience, $250 has been automatically deducted from your checking account. Thank you, and remember to drive safely!"
"What the --" But it's too late. Your car crashes through the flimsy side rail and soars into the ravine below!
"You've got a ticket!"
"Dear driver. We see that you have willfully disregarded our previous message and are now recklessly speeding at 142.8mph. While we understand you may be in a hurry, it's not fair to endanger the other drivers around --"
KA-BOOOOM
Peace PatientZero
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
Come on guys. The guy was going 90 MPH. Unless he was the only person on the road, he was endangering countless lives other than his own. He was also endangering ACME's minivan. I would feel for the guy if he was boned for going 56 mph three times. But I will never feel sorry for a guy who was flagerently violating the law. He was also flagerently violating his rental agreement.
Also note, the article in no ways indicates the guy is disputing the fact that he was going 90 MPH. His only complaint is that he didn't know it would cost him so dearly.
If I owned the rental car company, I would look into this system. Not to track every car going 5 mph over the limit, but to prevent people from going 30 mph over the limit.
quack
Because smoke detectors don't track my movement through the hotel, nor do they report back to my wife if I bring a girl back to my room.
>Good. And neither does this device.
um.. yes it does. It told ACME exactly where he went and how long he was at said locations...
If he went to a strip club, that information was easily gained via the data that ACME picked up.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
JEsus. I lived in LA for 6 months and I did that merge a couple times. Who needs caffeine to get the heart pumping??
:) If I got caught in rush hour, it would take me damn near an hour to go from Melrose & Crescent Hgts to Sunset & San Vicente. About 2-3 miles. I walked it faster than that once. When I missed rush hour, it took me about 10-15 minutes, depending on the lights and the pedestrians on Melrose.
:)
On the other hand, the other job I got shifted me back an hour so I missed the rush traffic.
California has some fucked up driving laws, as well. What's with this "motorcycles allowed to drive between lanes" shit? In TN, that's called "open season." Same goes for pedestrians out of cross-walks. In the crosswalk, the driver is at fault. Out of crosswalk, oh well, buddy, tough shit, better luck next time. Shouldn't have been jaywalkin'.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
/*Why not buy your own radar gun and "pull over" drivers who speed, and charge them $50? How is what ACME doing any different? */
Because, unlike your "random motorist", ACME owns the car you are renting. They have a right to ensure that their property is being used in a manner that they deem fitting. If they don't want you to speed (for whatever reason), then they can stipulate it in the contract and then enforce it via a method they choose. I think GPS is too crappy for it, maybe trucker-like blackboxes would be more accurate. However, those suckers are expensive and would probably offset any insurance deductions.
Yeah, it fucking sucks, but if you don't like it, don't rent from ACME.
Oh, and the pulling over scenario, I honestly can't say this is true, but from what I understand, a citizen's arrest is very much what you're talking about. Now, getting the asshole to pull over might be different and traffic "crimes" may be different than others. See your local police department for details on how to go about performing a "citizen's arrest".
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
I was shocked to see that the gps speeding system seemed to be automatically linked to his checking account because the funds had been withdrawn before he even reached his destination
The reason for this was he used his debit card to get the rental. I imagine the system reports infractions back to its base as soon as they happen and they put a credit against the card number used for that customer. This guy would have had less hassle if he had used a real credit card. He could have disputed the charges with his card company.
Those sensors are great for cars but suck for motorcycles. I have to run red lights quite a bit on the bike or wait for a car to pull up and set off the sensor. On busy cross streets I usually have to press the crosswalk button to change the light.
The only way to raise enough interest from the public to get stupid laws repealed is to make people obey them. Here in MD we have TONS of 6 lane divided highways that are posted 55mph. That's ridiculous. *Nobody* drives below 70-75 on these things. It's just another way the cops have to pull you over anytime they feel like it. Posted limits are for the most part far below the real limits of the road and modern vehicles. But nobody complains because nobody is really being forced to drive that slow. Cops have passed me when I was doing 75 on one of these 55mph roads before without so much as a glance. For the most part, they don't do anything unless you're doing 80 or above. I just resent the fact that I have to drive what everyone on the road considers a reasonable speed in fear of getting pulled over by the random guy in blue that's having a bad day. I'd much rather the limit be bumped up to 75 and then *really* get a ticket for doing more than that. Until the laws are enforced as they're written, however, people won't complain in large enough numbers to get things changed. Maybe more stupid ideas like the one being discussed in this article will finally get people off their asses and start writing to their representatives to get things changed. And yes, before anyone asks, I have written to my representatives. But as I mentioned, unless LOTS more start doing that, nobody is going to take notice.
They're obviously using GPS because it's the simplest way to handle different types of vehicles with almost no installation/maintenance hassles but it does give rise to some privacy concerns. They should not be allowed to make commercial use of, nor publish, logged GPS information. Whether that information could be subpoena'd for use in court... well, I dunno.
In general though, I like this idea, since it will likely translate into lower insurance rates.
I don't believe you should hold the store liable just because the product sucked. They don't manufacture printers, they just sell 'em.
You probably were pissed just because you failed to research the product beforehand. That's no reason to be an ass about it.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
I was referring more to the way you said you handled the situation. Restocking fees are pretty standard, and are there to help cover the costs involved with returns. You shouldn't have to pay a restocking fee if the product was actually damaged; in your case, if the printer wouldn't print at all, or left nasty streaks all over the page, or something like that. Returning a product just because you decide it isn't sufficient for your needs is a very different situation. The store did nothing wrong...they didn't sell you a broken printer. Not only that, but most likely the only reason they waived the fee is because you bitched long enough that the cost of having employees sit there and listen to you began to outweigh the fee.
If you're going to be a stickler for good customer service, pick better battles to fight.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Most places I've seen that primarily deal with electronics and computer equipment charge a 10-15% restocking fee on returns...but only if the merchandise is being returned for reasons other than damage. If CompUSA is charging a restocking fee on *damaged* merchandise, then that's bullshit and it should be changed. I have no problem with restock fees for "whim" returns (I didn't like it, I realized I couldn't eat next week if I spend that much, etc). The reason you gave for your return falls into this group.
Customer satisfaction hasn't been the ultimate goal of most businesses for quite some time, especially chain retail stores like CompUSA. Speaking from the experience of someone who has worked for companies that'll bend over backwards to keep a customer happy, I can say that it severely affects the bottom line if you always say "Yes, sir, that's fine, whatever you say." The customer is not always right.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Fair enough, I won't. I have a good driving record and I don't steal stuff. (and I am not going to start with a Taurus that has a crappy stereo and smells like smoke...)
Rental car companies have done just fine without GPS/monitoring for a long time. I'm willing to present evidence that I can be trusted with a rental car. I'll sign a contract saying I won't do 6a-f above, and I'll take responsibility if I fail. Given all this, it is hard for me to trust a company that places so little trust in me.
As a New Yorker, aside from the cabbies (which truly are the worst drivers in the world,) the average boston driver is worse than the average New Yorker. The Grid Iron street pattern of NYC makes sense, and we don't have to deal with the Big Dig.
Did you hear that they made it illegal to smother a child to death with blankets in Colorado? Now, what would we do without those thoughtful politicians to help us? Doubtless, this law will be used at some point in the future to arrest a political dissident for tucking his/her kids in bed at night.
Traffic laws have a purpose and are useful, but like so many other things they get bastardized by the politicos. Studies are revealing that town that install those red-light cameras are not shortening the length that the yellow-light stays on. The bastards don't have the balls to tell people that they can't have everything in the world without someone paying for it and then either raise taxes or cut 'services', so they try to raise money by making people 'criminals'.
Whenever you hear that politicians are quarreling instead of 'getting things done' or 'going about the nations business', drop to one knee and thank whatever diety you pray to. Personally, I think they should pull the air-conditioners out of the Congressional Building and all the state legislature buildings. That way the bastards would go home in the summer and have less time to think up ways to fuck us all.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
I'll try and dignify you with an answer just in case I'm mistaken:
I was simply asking a question I found intellectually interesting. If cars are required to have these GPS devices in them, how would one get around being moniterred by them? I believe everyone has a right to this knowledge. You are correct, some people will use this knowledge to break the law. But remember there is a bell curve. On the other end are the people who use this knowledge to stop the people who break laws. And in the middle are the vast majority of people, who either know and do nothing, or don't know and don't care. I'm simply saying that those people in the center have a right to know.
I was in no way advocating breaking laws, I was simple asking a question which piqued my interest.
---
---
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
When they fine you, will they also notify the police that you were speeding?
Eh? Just seems shady to me. No speeding ticket, the police don't get notified, and the rental company gets paid. And as a bonus, if you get pulled over by the cops, you get to pay both the police and the rental company. What an amazing business plan guys!---
---
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
I got a ticket in the mail with a nice picture showing my car, license plate prominent, going through a red light in Brooklyn.
It's damn hard to contest when you actually did it and they have you on film doing it. D'Oh!
Of course, there are ways to fool the system. I know people who started shalacking [sic] their license plates with some reflective coating, so that when a picture was taken, all that one could see was a bright blur.
So the question is how would one get around the GPS sytem if it were imposed? Because even if you could somehow keep the GPS system from telling the central station that you were speeding, you'd now be the only person on the road going above the speed limit, making it very easy for a cop to spot you and pull you over. I guess the trick would be to have the GPS system tell the station that you were a different car, and then you could go marginally above the speed limit without being stopped. I don't know. And I'm really rambling nonsensically now. So I'll stop.
---
---
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
Um, yes, thats why the traffic slows down during rush hour.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
And if people type in more than a certan number of plates in an hour THEIR car gets turned off
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
MapQuest integration would be really cool. Even better - extend your car GPS navigation system to get real-time traffic info and use it to compute plans. With central coordination, this could have a dramatic impact on traffic conditions. Possibly even to the point of delaying/reducing the need for road expansions.
I'd buy it, anyway.
One danger: people get the system and use it to tour the city all day gawking at accidents. Yikes!
1)It is still not leagal for any of these people to drive above the speed limit.
2)jurisdiction does not exsist here....no law enforcement bodies.(btw its their shit, their deal)
3)sampleing over a long period of time, like a minute or two would fix this problem, I can only guess as to how long of an interval they truely sample over
There should be no question about the absolute velocity accuracy of GPS exceeding that of your car speedometer. I have consistently measured the error, and it hovers around 0.1 m/s rms, over a 1 hour period, with maximum errors of about 0.3 m/s. Now, in USA/English units, 0.1 m/s is about 0.22 mph (miles/hour), which is much better than your car speedometer.
Most decent GPS units actually measure the velocity completely independently of the position. I use an Earthmate, which is based on a Rockwell Zodiac/Jupiter board. It has separate processing for the Doppler information to provide the velocity information (according to the Rockwell information sheets), so even if the position is somewhat poorly converged, the velocity is quite good. I believe this is pretty typical of other units, too.
You know, I love Benzes. And MGs, and Triumphs, and Ferraris. But I drive a 1966 Dodge Coronet 500. She's fast with a 318ci v-8. With a 440 or a 426 hemi, she'd eat an M5 for lunch. The best part is that the Coronet 500 wasn't built to be a supercar, and it was affordable. I would love to drive an AMG Hammer, or a 456gt, but I'm just not counting on having that kind of cash anytime in the next year or so. In 1966, buying a mopar with a 426 hemi was something almost anybody could afford to do, and 425 hp and 490 lb/ft of torque is certainly enough to perform. Of course, a 1966 mopar will likely handle like a pig (mine does)...
itachi
I've done this before - I lost my old '85 Toyota van because somebody blew a red light coming down a hill while I was making a left turn. I was about to go into second, but as soon as I saw the blur I threw it back into first and floored it. The damage to the back quarter skewed the frame and destroyed the vehicle, but that's preferable to a radiator through the legs (old Toyota vans had no front-end).
Except in this case, you're not drastically exceeding the speed limit, you're hyper-accelerating - probably from a pretty low speed to start with. A GPS tracking system probably wouldn't catch this, and any cop who saw the maneuver would, I like to think, have the decency to commend your awareness and skill rather than cite you.
--
if 50% of the drivers on the road used the override button, lots of paper work will be generated that no one can be prosecuted!
------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
Oh, so we should all drive to the lowest common denominator?! I'd like to get out of first gear thanks. If the other folks on the road don't have the skill to drive or can't bother to pay enough attention then GET OFF THE ROAD. Driving isn't a god given right, it's a privilage (sp?). Let's up the driver's skill tests, make people really renew licenses, and get the morons off the road! I may not hit 90 all that often around here but I sure as heck hit 75 on a regular basis and 100 occasionally. 90mph is no big deal so long as traffic and road conditions permit. Nothing scary or magical about it, if you can drive 55 or 60 85 or 90 isn't that big a deal unless oyu're driving a piece of junk. In which case please stay to the right.
I hate the idea of red light cameras but with as many fools as we've to running lights here I'm starting to warm up to them. Funny though, if an officer was standing there manning the camera or pulling poeple over not only would they get enough revenue to pay his salary but they would help solve ht problem - why isn't this being done?
What burns ME the most is the "aggresive driver imaging in use" crap. Since when is a driver going 10mph over the limit "aggresive". That's a PC term for photo radar and the general public is too stupid to realize it and owuld go apeshit if they knew what it was. How nice of them to come up with a PC name for it to make us all feel warm and fuzzy...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
We have the right to face our accusors (sp?) in this country. When a mechanical device is used to "accuse" you there's no ability for you to "face" that and dispute the accusation.
Sadly, I'm actually finding myself warming up to red light cameras. I don't know why so many people have begun to think it's okay to run red lights, I used to think it was just in my area. I took a long trip by car recently and found that this wasn't so - I was shocked!
What's happened that has allowed everyone to think it's okay to run red lights? It wasn't this bad 10 years ago I'm sure. What has changed? Is it the youth of today or the general feelings of the country? I'm truly puzzled but I DO try my best not to run them - it's just stupid. Speeding on the other hand, I drive what's comfortable and prudent and pay little if any attention to the posted limits.
I HAVE found the new popularity in my area of signs on speed limit posts that say "additional $200 fine for speeding" to be a bit disturbing though. Who makes these decisions and why is the public so shortsighted as to allow it?!
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
I didn't see the article claiming that anyone called it a mild deterrent.
Yes, I can, and it doesn't apply, as it's a concept of criminal law, not civil (think OJ). You're the one disregarding contract law, and you don't have a constitutional right to privacy from a property owner on/in their property. While I doubt that there is a question as to whether a rental car company can specify limits on the use of their vehicles in their contracts (for example, here's Hertz's Driving Restrictions), it's certainly arguable that Acme wasn't clear enough as to how they would determine that the speed limit was exceeded.
Mind you, I'm not saying that I agree with doing this - if Hertz started doing this, I'd take my personal business elsewhere (I don't have a choice on work rentals).
Driving at the posted 55 (say) in pissing rain or 20feet visibility fog is theoretically legal
I don't know about other countries or states, but here in California we have the Basic Speed Law, which states that it is illegal to drive faster than is safe for the current conditions (e.g. pissing rain or heavy fog), no matter what the posted limit is.
(I used to think it also meant that if it was clear and dry and there was no traffic, you could drive 100 mph if you thought it was safe. The judge didn't agree.)
Can you imagine the outcry if you were to disqualify any group of people from driving in the US?
Problem is that driving licences have been abused into being general ID's. IIRC In some parts of the US there is even legislation endorsing this perversion. Let alone the bizare idea of someone losing their licence for something unrelated to driving, but possibly keeping it even for causing death or serious injury with a motor vehicle.
Golly, that would suck to be stuck in a 30 zone, needing to go 60 to get out of the way of an oncoming truck.
Would not a better solution be better driver training and education?
Guess who?
I would amplify this statement. Anyone who claims that "speeding" is dangerous, but going under the speed limit isn't, has obviously not spent much time driving in the real world.
When someone is going 10 MPH over the traffic flow, they are no threat to me as long as they don't tailgate or swerve around traffic. Both of which are serious traffic violations in their own right and not directly related to speeding.
But someone going 10 MPH *under* the traffic flow causes traffic to back up behind them. This makes it much more difficult for vehicles to merge in or out of traffic since there's a solid wall of vehicles. The 'patience-impaired' will try to change lanes to avoid the bottleneck, often with insufficient regard to the possibility of high speed traffic coming up behind them.
If it's a $50 dollar ticket to go 10 MPH over traffic flow, I think it should be a $200 ticket to be going 10 MPH under the traffic flow without a good reason. (Bad weather, high glare, etc., are all good reasons. Just cause it's "safer" isn't.)
Even on surface streets, you can easily see problems with below-speed traffic. I live at the end of a dead-end street, and occasionally encounter drivers who think 15 MPH is "safer" than the standard 25 MPH.
That sounds great... if you're near the entrance. If you're at the end of a half-mile road, though, you're bored out of your skull and pay a lot *less* attention to the road. After all, this is about half of the regular (and customary) speed.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I think you were responding to more than just me... but to answer the on-point issues
1) I'm not urging frivilous rejections, but a lot of companies are leaving consumers no other option and the courts, CC issues, and other agencies know this. Besides my CC war stories, I can give you a good example in the local cable TV franchise. I told them, repeatedly, I had changed banks and they were to cease auto-debits.
They kept agreeing, then tried to charge the account anyway. Since the bank refused it, I got hit with a $25 NSF fee.
My former bank also charged me initially, until I explained the situation. They could not legally refuse the bank drafts, due to some insane federal regulation. But I could sign a document that the charges were fradulent - and they were, since the company had been informed, repeatedly, that they were to cease such withdrawals.
For close to a year they kept trying to debit the closed account. It is undoubtably a coincidence, nothing more, that it stopped shortly after I became so frustrated at their continuing debits and refusal to identify the appropriate franchise agency that I wrote the state's Attorney General to inquire whether this constituted criminal fraud. I sure as hell would be facing a criminal prosecution if I floated bad checks for a year, and here was a company doing the same thing then demanding I pay them $25/shot for their failure to update their own records.
I'm NOT painting your company with the same brush, just pointing out that these complaints may carry a lot more weight than you would expect since many companies are clearly attempting to intimidate the poor and ill-informed into paying outrageous bogus charges. If the CC issuer is presented a bill for an after-the-fact-charge-with-no-appeal, they might not be quick to assume the customer is at fault, even if the contract would seem to support the claim.
It's worth noting that it appears ACME is *not* informing customers of this bill when they return the car, something that should be trivial to do by reading the GPS data as part of the check-in process. They didn't even bother calling him. They just yanked the money out of the account without his knowledge, much less consent, and then said "sorry, no appeals." THAT is unnecessary and incredibly abusive - the charges should either be made when the customer signs the final paperwork, or after he's been given reasonable notice. Not this "two days later" (or whatever it was) crap.
2) Of course the number and type of violations matter. Three separate incidents over 500 miles, say, is serious. I exceeded 80 MPH only twice over an 8000 mile trip, and both were for unusual circumstances. (The near collision near Seattle, and heavy Friday evening traffic out of Los Angeles where there was literally no alternative road through the dessert.)
3) Keep all the records you want. As I said, I have a clean driving record. (Well, I was just in a 2-mph accident at a poorly constructed intersection, but that was the first accident in almost 20 years, and the first non-PR ticket in nearly as long.) If somebody really is a dangerous driver I don't want you renting to him either!
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
You say that the contract doesn't need any way to appeal a charge, since it's not a court of law?
Guess what? YOU WILL END UP IN A COURT OF LAW with that attitude. All the vict... customer has to do is sign an document claiming that the $150 "surcharge" was fradulent and very few (read: no) bank won't take it seriously. The charge will be reversed and it will be up to YOU to prove to a court, not the bank, that the charge is valid and enforceable under the contract.
Once you're in a real court you'll have to deal with real issues. E.g., the last time I hit 90 on an interstate it was because some asshole in a SUV was busy chewing out his children... and his foot pressed down on the accelerator as he twisted around in his seat. I was in front of him, and blocked by traffic and the K-bar from changing lanes. I had floored the accelerator, and was literally bracing for impact, when the wife (I believe) finally let the driver know that he was about to kill them all.
To this day I think I made a mistake by not immediately calling the *DUI on my celphone. Maybe he wasn't drunk, but he was just as dangerous as he drive down I-5 in heavy traffic with no attention to what was in front of him.
Let's say this gets to court. On the one hand is ACME saying that the contract requires a $150 fine for excessive speed. No exceptions. Technologie uber alles.
On the other hand is a breathing human being with a clean driving record. He testisfies that he felt the choice was simple: speed, or be rear-ended on a busy interstate at 65+ MPH. At best, the rental car would be totalled. (And it would NOT be chargeable against the vehicle renter since he was rear-ended while driving in a safe and legal manner.) But there was enough traffic that this would probably trigger a chain reaction and many people would be seriously injured or killed.
That's an absolute no-brainer, and if ACME's lawyers were stupid enough to actually take the case to court a judge might decide that the ENTIRE contract is unenforceable because it shocks the sensibility. You can't claim that the fine is "for safety" while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge that in rare conditions (this was the first time I've experienced this in over 20 years of driving) it's critical to avoid a deadly collision.
The author of a contract might try to ignore this, but a court of law deciding enforceability of a contract will not. And if the contract is invalidated, the company has much more to lose. (E.g., do all current renters suddenly become de facto owners of their cars? They paid money for the car, after all...)
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
And of course... what happens when a pregnant wife must be rushed to the hospital, or an on-duty volunteer EMT has to get to the local ambulance service to pick up the emergency vehicle.
Cops on the street will ask *why* you are speeding for a reason! There are many perfectly valid reasons, none of which can be covered by an automated system such as the one used here.
A few other people here have also mentioned signal loss and sudden jumps in location. IANAL, but I would like to see just how badly this company can be sued for intervening where it has no jurisdiction or proof.
--
Shaun Thomas: INN Programmer
Read: Rabbit Rue - Free serial nove
From previous article:h tm l#433
4
http://slashdot.org/articles/00/01/04/1024239.s
Also mentioned in some debate about this:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/21.23.html#subj1
Become a FSF associate member before the low #s are used
I agree there... about 2/3 of the stop signs around here could have simply been yield signs.
Most of them are treated like yield signs anyway... personally, I stop.
My pet peeve is people who don't realize that you're supposed to STOP before turning right on red. I get horns honked at me almost every day for that.
Just a quick note on the parent thread: sometimes red light running is justified... but most of the time it isn't. I always stop and check for others, even if it looks deserted.
Maybe that's just because I've only been driving for a year and a half.
o/~ All God's children shall be free in Pirates of the Caribbean, when we reach that Magic Kingdom in the sky... o/~
Yes, you claim, but there will be a market for the one firm that provides cars with no speeding restrictions. Really? What if there isn't quite that much demand? What if their insurance company refuses to insure their cars? (Well, everyone else limits their speed, so your cars are obviously more liable to accidents now...)
What next? Do you set up your own rental company, and an insurance company to insure it?
I hate it when people spout off their infinite faith in capitalism without thinking through the consequences... The companies are out to get your money, and they don't give a damn about your liberties or rights or anything. Just something to think about. And I won't even bother to extend my analogy to casual genetic screening, for example.
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
ACME had better have itself some damn good lawyers....
/.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
This is just a stupid idea. what happens when you merge onto a fast moving freeway at 55 MPH? You get REAR ENDED. If everyone is going 70, you had BETTER be going 70 +- 10% too.
Besides, if they're just recording the "max speed" I've seen that jump around if you go through an area of poor reception. The receiver thinks you've jumped from location A to location B really quickly, result, extremely short lived spike in speed of 20% or more. Sometimes when walking around, I look down and see that my max walking speed was actually 15 MPH... Not likely.
Unless they're using this to do something like fine customers whose sustained speed was over 90 MPH for 2 minutes or more, this is just a stupid way to get short term money, and lose long term customers.
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) http://www.endpointcomputing.com a scientific approach to custom computing.
Fun or not, you'll still get yourself killed, and you give a bad name to ALL motorcyclists.
I'm a motorcyclist as well. However, you will rarely see me going faster than the flow of traffic. Yes, that means that sometimes I'm exceeding the speed limit. But I'm not weaving in and out of traffic, and blowing by people like they're standing still.
It only take ONE car that doesn't see you to turn you into hamburger.
Airneil
Wow....censors? So they bleep out my foul language when the light turns red?
Seriously though, sensor-equipped lights are great, but many intersections rely strictly on timers. It would be great if the money was available to convert these lights, or to make sure they're synchronized so that you don't have to stop at every light on a given road. Instead, money is being spent on automatic enforcement devices, which turn into a relatively cheap revenue stream for the municipality.
To get these things through, they use emotional stories of people getting killed so that no one can argue against it without being branded as encouraging the deaths of others. (Try debating against lowering the legal blood-alcohol levels...facts and rational thought are useless against sobbing mothers in the public eye.)
So, let's say we agree that red-light cameras are great, and that any infringement on personal liberty is outweighed by the benefits to society. After a few years, everyone is used to the idea of being watched in this way. Now, imagine if the local police could put video cameras in every room of your house and monitor them for illegal activity. You'd feel a lot safer, wouldn't you? The cops would be able to see if someone had broken in and was trying to kill you. Giving up any amount of liberty in the name of safety is a slippery slope....
True, but the automated toll systems know who you are, so the whole thing could be automated to add your speeding fine to your toll bill. The "old way" requires a cop there to write out the tickets....
Actually, the fact that this particular system only triggered above 90 mph is perhaps the worst part.
From a safety standpoint, going through a school zone at 55 mph is far worse than doing 90 on a lightly traveled highway.
So speeding through residential areas, areas with high traffic, etc. won't get you fined by ACME, even though you're running a much greater risk of damaging ACME's property and the property of others.
Fine, but my point is that what they're doing isn't necessarily increasing safety. Like a cop in a speed trap, they're going after the easy prey, which are typically those who aren't a major threat.
Well, let's see...
Drunk drivers cause a very high percentage of motor vehicle accidents that result in death. Those who are involved in such accidents typically are repeat offenders who have BAC's of 0.15 or higher. Most states in the U.S. have had laws putting 0.10 as the legal limit. The most impaired and most dangerous drivers are, at that standard, legally drunk.
Now, the push is on to lower the legal limit to 0.08. This will cause more people to be arrested for driving under the influence. This may appear good, but we can't even keep the most dangerous repeat offenders off the roads. Now, we're going to add in the burden of people who, while they may be impaired to some extent, are not the main cause of deaths.
Say Jim Smith is driving along with a burnt out taillight, not weaving or driving recklessly. He gets pulled over. Cop smells alcohol on his breath. Gives him a breathalyzer..... "I'm sorry Mr. Smith. Last week I could have sent you on your way, but due to tougher drunk driving laws, you're under arrest." Now the officer has to deal with the paperwork....about 2 hours of paperwork for a DWI arrest. Add to that the extra load on the courts, which can't even effectively deal with the existing DWI caseload, and you've got real problems dealing with the situation. Not to mention the fact that if a lot more people are arrested for DWI, it's going to have about as much stigma as a speeding ticket, and it won't be thought of as the serious issue that it is.
Gee, I can understand the government mandating something like this - I mean, who cares if the citizens get pissed off about it, they can either take it or go off to the Ministry of Love.
But a private company? You can bet that the next time I need to rent a car, this company is now at the bottom of the list. I'm fairly sure that most other peiople would act similarly. Pissing off your customers (potential and actual) is not the way to make a profit.
Sounds like you guys should avoid Arby's
Because smoke detectors don't track my movement through the hotel, nor do they report back to my wife if I bring a girl back to my room.
Oh, and the state trooper was in the passengers seat egging him on.
I guess it depends on how well you know the trooper.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
... to Germany. Here is still no general speed limit on Autobahnen. Boy, had I fun this evening breaking down from 170 km/h (dunno what this is in mph, but over 100 for sure) to 80 because a truck was overtaking.
If you have no speed limit, you have more variation in speeds driven, so it gets more dangerous. If you drive the same style on the Autobahn as Californains on the Freeways (I was only visiting Cal twice, I cant speak for anything else), it would be deadly.
Just my 2 European Cent,
Uli
Be careful with this approach. There are formulas out there for determining how long the yellow phase should last in relation to the speed limit of the road they are on.
In other words, city streets with a speed limit of 25 or 30 have much shorter yellows than a boulevard with a speed limit of 50 or 60. This topic is discussed from time to time in the misc.transport.road newsgroup.
There's a number of problems:
Unfortunately this case is in small claims court. If the guy's lawyer is any good, that list, plus a few other items, will come out in court, assuming a good judge who doesn't limit the time for arguments to 5 minutes. Acme could get bitch-slapped on this one in a regular court, but I believe american small claims courts have a limit of $500. The guy will get his $450 back, and ACME will have to pay court costs. Nothing to discourage them from continuing the practice.
The AirIQ device is one of a number of commercial devices available to trucking companies to regularly track their fleets. They use a GPS to monitor position, and send the data back through a low speed satellite connection to the AirIQ office, which then offers real-time maps, lists of speeding drivers, and other services to companies.
Here in Europe many companies are starting to use them to track the contents of shipping containers which are being hi-jacked by organised groups and transported to eastern europe or re-sold within western europe. I saw some demonstations of different units at the last CeBit, amazing how small they can make the units, and the techniques they have for getting signals in and out of steel shipping containers.
I can understand trucking companies wanting to know when a driver has exceeded his maximum awake time, or gone too fast on the autobahn after taking 4 hours for lunch, or tracking the contents of a hi-jacked truck. But when such technology starts to filter into mainstream society, its time to raise a large fuss. This court case will hopefully start the fuss going in the US.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
The French Gendarmerie used to do this, but enough tickets were successfully fought in court to limit their use to the most heinous offenders. In France, the police have to actually witness you performing the crime to write a ticket, and with just two timestamps, it wasn't enough evidence for the courts. But for the worst offenders, if there happens to be a Gendarme patrol at the exit plaza, they can be signalled by the toll booth operator.
I've known people who have done Paris-Lyon in 2.2 hours, which puts their average speed at around 200 Km/h (the autoroute limit is 130), and didn't have any problems at the toll plazas. But I've also been stopped several times pulling out of toll plazas by Gendarmes who stand behind the toll booths and randomly pick on 1 out of every several cars. Mostly just breath tests, or to check the papers of the car for insurance. I never got a ticket, though.
They are testing a new system in France (north of Paris, mostly on the A1) where they are using airplanes to catch speeders and dangerous drivers. To avoid loopholes, they put a judge in the plane, and he radios to a judge on the ground with the complaint when you get pulled over. So you now have the sworn testimony of a judge d'instruction to fight in court (or maybe you are judged on the spot, IANAFL). Plus they have a stabilised video system in the plane for evidence. They are showing it at Le Bourget this week.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
Please come to Atlanta and do this :)
Let me know where and when though; I don't want to get caught in the crossfire.
Bias alert: I work for Progressive. Adjust your filters accordingly.
The insurance company will put this in my car and monitor it and know my every move. How fast I go. Where I go, when and how often.
The program (called "Autograph", and only rolled out in Texas IIRC) was based on the idea that your premium would be pay-as-you-go. Park the car for a month, premium drops. Drive lots of miles at high speeds at night and garage in high-risk areas, pay accordingly.
Not only is this an invasion of privacy, I would suspect I would get worse insurance rates than I am getting now instead of better.
How can something that's voluntary be an invasion of privacy? As for your rates going up, that depends on your driving habits. Which was the whole idea, you pay according to the risk of your driving habits.
I'm not involved in the project, I don't know how well it did or if it's going to be ongoing. But I think it's an innovative idea.
Here is a short article about it from the IEEE. Punching "progressive insurance autograph gps" into google will return lots more.
I've gotten one before on the Ohio Turnpike. Took a picture of the license plate and mailed me the ticket.
Are you sure you remembered to pay the toll? They're kinda picky about that...
There's more to unsafe driving than speeding.
And there's more to the Autograph system than measuring speed. Did you bother to read up on it or did you just jerk the knee?
Don't worry about it. I used to develop GIS applications, and we did a lot of projects with GPS recievers. They're touchy as all hell, and you always lose connections here and there. It would be EXTREMELY EASY to disable the (requrired) antenna, either with a switch or via electronic means (coupling noise, etc). This makes it unfeasible. You could even get slicker than that and spoof your signal, anyhow.
I don't think it'll ever happen. I wouldn't stand for it, that infringes on my freedom to the point where I'm willing to stand up in front of a judge, and I think a lot of other people (in North America) feel the same way. Safe speeds on freeways are often 20-30km/h above posted in traffic.
..don't panic
Or, if your speed decreases from, say 50 mph, to 0 mph within 1 second, (and perhaps the same happened to another car very close to you) perhaps they can automatically dispatch an ambulance or something.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
I was on a long trip across the country and I kept noticing that it was taking me longer to get there than I had calculated. Turns out my odometer was 2% fast, meaning that it was reading 2% farther than I actually went.
When I talked to the dealer about it, I was informed that Honda actually designs their speedometers to read 10% faster than your actual speed! Sure enough when I measured it, the odometer was 2% fast but the odometer consistently 10% fast!
My problem with this is that I tend to drive right at the speed limit, mostly out of habit, and come to find out I'm actually driving 10% UNDER the speed limit. So around here where interstate speed limits are 70, I actually have to drive 77 just to be at the speed limit!
I'm not a journalist, but I play one on slashdot
>steering confusing an already drug-addled car thief), called the cops, had them circle the car,
>and take them away. We get our car back, the bad guys don't know what happened, and dozens of
>innocent pedestrians are happy instead of being smashed to pulp during a car chase. More boring
>for the TV news copters, but oh well.
Now there's an idea to make a profit!
Why don't you make it better for the TV news copters? Get exclusive contracts with one of the
big networks to pay you when ever one of your cars are in a chase.
Now, here's the good part. Instead of killing the engine - *increase* the car's speed! Next, tell
the news choppers where the car is. If the traffic is too heavy for a good chase, then
display directions on the navigation system to the nearest freeway. What the hell, make it more
interesting, and direct them to a freeway exit and send them going the wrong way - even better for ratings.
The theives are stupid, they won't understand whats happening - imaging, in court "Yes, your
honor, the car started going quickly all by its self. Yes, just at the same moment the police and
new helicopter showed up."
Finally, patent this as a business method and sell it to the other rental companies.
There's gotta be a fortune in this!
"The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
I'll be worried when the rental car companies start putting brodie, e-brake, police turn around, secret service manuver, etc... sensors on the chevy malibu that I always seem to get stuck with.
(B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
...but I still wouldn't do business with them.
I'd file them right next to companies on the piss list.
Sure, an employer can require a drug test, but if any prospective employer asked me to piss in a bottle, I'd say "I'd rather piss all over your desk. What, you find that offensive? Okay, so do you get the point?"
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I personally know of cases in Oregon and California where the defendant argued their 6th Amendment right and were found not guilty.
Protect your constitutional rights or they will be infringed!
Too big to fail? Does that make me to small to succeed?
They didn't cite him. They just charged him $150 per occurrence, as per their rental agreement.
Personally, I think the rental company's being more honest than the cops -- most speeding tickets are handed out to enhance city revenues, not enhance motorist safety. At least the rental department's being honest about it. ("It's got nothing to do with the police, we just want the money")
In GA i've never heard of anyone getting busted outside of a school zone for anything less than 15.
I actually think that the truly universal rule is go as fast as you want as long as someone is going faster.
Also, laws do not apparently apply to sport bikes.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Ever been to Atlanta? In NYC and Boston you have valid options for getting around without dealing with the roads.
But ing Atlanta (and in Houston, and LA) you just have to drive, or rather park on the highway, sit and wait for someone to go insane in the july heat and do something monumentally stupid, like driving INTO a stopped oil truck.
Geez these rednecks amaze me.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
If you ever get a ticket for running a light in this manner, go back to the intersection and time how long the yellow light lasts. There have been more than a few municipalities shortening the length of yellow lights at intersections where they have these camera ticket systems setup. If you can show that the yellow light didn't last a sufficient amount of time to allow you to either safely clear the intersection or come to a safe stop then the ticket is bogus and ought to be thrown out.
Yeah. But if a yellow light lasts 2 seconds on a road with a speed limit of 50mph, it's pretty obvious that the yellow wasn't long enough.
Now I'm not justifying the person to whom you are replying, however in my town we are required by law to have both reflectors and also headlights if we are biking at night.
--Remove chicken to e-mail
Unplug the GPS. Or reconnect it once every few minutes. People here are forgetting that the GPS won't be permanently on.
Speeding may be a crime from the government's perspective, but it's a violation of a contract from the company's perspective. You are not at risk, currently in the situation under discussion, of being thrown in jail or charged with a criminal violation because of this technology. You are being charged a fee for using their property beyond specifications.
Not really
That would be true if the *current* speed limits were consistently enforced. Of course, the current speed limits have very little to do with safety and much more to do with revenue generation. I would rather see speed limits increased to a level such that you are clearly driving dangerously by exceeding them (maybe 80-85 on interstates, 50-60 on main roads, 35-40 on residential). You would still have people violating the law so the revenue source wouldn't dry up, but it would actually be dangerous drivers paying the fines, as opposed to the negative lottery we have today.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
I have a 1995 model car with the stock size tires on it and the speedo reads 3 MPH higher than my actual speed. They can't afford to give tickets to people for any less than MAYBE 5 MPH over, when my late-model car's speedo is inaccurate, the road is uneven, and my right foot is twitchy from caffeine overdose.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Yeah, you'd think they would make those things a bit more sensitive. I mean, do people who weigh as much as a motorcycle go for a walk at 3 AM?
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
If ACME didn't want their clients to speed and truly believed what their lawyer states:
Brunswick claims it's for humanitarian reasons, that it's not about collecting money. "It saves lives by discouraging speeding. It's an accepted [rental car] trade practice." He didn't know if his client was presetting speed limits.
They would simply install govenors in the car's transmission, which would make it impossible for the car to go over 65mph. Honestly I think this is just a case of corporate greed.
--
microsoft, it's what's for dinner
bq--3b7y4vyll6xi5x2rnrj7q.com
it's a sig, wtf?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Perhaps the speed limiter isn't using the speedometer and is actually more accurately calibrated? (or vice-versa) Or perhaps the speedometer is deliberately left reading a higher speed than the actual travel speed (as are most cars sold in the US; I don't know if this practice extends overseas, as well).
Can a company legally say "don't use this product for illegal purposes. If you do, we're going to charge you more."? That really seems like it makes them an accomplice of the criminal rather than an innocent business associate (eg the difference between "I can sell you this AR15 for $1500" and "I can sell you this AR15 for $1500 unless you're using it to defend your pot field, in which case I need $3000."
Yeap. Thank-you for putting it more eloquently then me.
> But someone going 10 MPH *under* the traffic flow causes traffic to back up behind them.
Hear Hear!
I agree, one idiot driver driving REAL slow (no, not grandpa) pissing off the 20 drivers behind him is just as unsafe!
I guess experienced drivers know when to drive with the flow of traffic, when to drive what the weather permits, and what your skill provides (i.e. higher speed cornering)
> Everytime you speed, you run the risk of killing someone.
Bullshit.
You can run the risk of killing someone while driving BELOW the speed limit. (i.e. rainy or winter driving conditions, etc.)
Speeding != driving reckless.
Speeding is a VICTIMLESS crime, which should NOT be illegal.
Now, reckless driving IS indangering someone else's life, which SHOULD be illegal (and it is.)
You don't need GPS to detect if your speed decreases from, say 50 mph, to 0 mph within 1 second. You can equally have a speed detector within the car, which can call the ambulance automatically. It can be placed say under the driver's seat, so that if it were destroyed and can't make the call, the chances are that you're destroyed anyway too.
---
Maybe it's just the way I parsed the parent's post, but I think that you're on a different wavelength. Running a red light doesn't necessarily mean blowing through the intersection at 50mph...
I feel completely justified when I run the red light by my house at 3AM and here's why:
That light *only* switches with sensors - it doesn't have a scheduled change pattern. It's also a "No Turn on Red" intersection. Problem is, it sometimes doesn't detect my little Miata.
The first couple months that I lived there, I would wait at the light until it changed. I once waited for 15 minutes until somebody in a truck pulled up behind me.
So, now I pull up to that light and sit for 3 minutes. If the light doesn't change I check and double check the intersection, then I run it.
Repeat after me: it is *NOT* the job of businesses to interpret *OR* enforce the law.
That is way we have our judicial system. Even if a police officer tags me with radar, lidar or whatever for exceeding the speed limit, I still have my oportunity to go to court and defend myself. That data is merely evidence which may or may not prove the crime.
Last I checked, the cops didn't take cash, debit or charge cards the second the infraction occured.
The most that they should be allowed to do is report you to the authorities and offer their GPS data as evidence (whether or not it is valid is for the *courts* to decide).
407 has a pile of cops on bridges already -- and it's not really the place of the highway authorities to give speeding tickets. Besides, the whole point of that highway is that it's 3 lanes wide of nice flat concrete, banked corners and damn near empty at 3am -- and a whole pile of fun...
Rod Taylor
One reason that they might do this is that speeders could be more expensive customers, in terms of a greater risk of accidents.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
What jurisdictional issues? The customer agreed to a contract, including the clause stipulating fees if he sped. He did; so he's obligated to pay, by prior mutual agreement.
Your "everday citizen" argument is an obvious non sequitor, since said citizen can't wave a contract signed by random speeders.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
but stupid drivers do.
I agree. The number of accidents did not increase when they increased the speed limit to 65 on interstates (and here, interstates are commuter highways).
Around here, i think alot of the problem is poor road and traffic designs. It backs everything up, thus pissing everyone off, and people make rash decisions when they're mad. Road rage anyone? I get alot more annoyed around here then i did living in a city with good road planning. I'm willing to bet that most of road rage problems are caused b/c poor road design.
B/c they tried that and found it caused more accidents then prevented.
I dunno what turnpikes you drive, but i've never had that happen to me on either the PA turnpike or the NY thruway. Which by the way has some of the worst speeders.
PA just got ezpass too, and decided NOT to do something like that. Probably b/c no one would get ezpass and the problem they are trying to solve (huge backups at exits) would be ruined. I sure wouldn't get ezpass if i was gonna be mailed a speeding ticket.
I doubt they will do that. I mean, wouldn't you dump the thing if you got mailed speeding tickets? And here in Philly, everyone dumping ezpass would return us to the exits backed up to the 2 mile sign problem.
Um, i think violating police powers would be enforcement of things normally left to the police. I can't give anyone a ticket even though i may have a radar gun.
Well maybe ohio does it, but they don't in NY or PA. Besides, in PA you can make up for speeding at the exit..where you can sit for 10+ minutes
It may not be a 'ticket', but SPEED ENFORCEMENT is left to the police. PIs can't go around seaching people's home, or arresting anyone, b/c those are duties performed SOLEY by police.
When you rent an apartment your apartment manager can't put clauses in that they can search your apartment for crack.
Also there is some dispute on just how clear the contract made things.
They don't have any rights to do some things only police can. They can't charge you with a crime, or punish you at all for that matter. They can't search your house (or even get a warrent for that matter). They can't sopena (sp?) phone records. The law states who may enforce the law, and right now that is only the police (in reguards to speeding violations). PIs aren't enforcing shit, they just dig it up.
BTW, it is also illegal for a landlord to include such a search clause in the contract. They are expressly forbidden to do so.
Um, please read what i wrote. I said apartment, not house. I certainly didn't own my own apartment.
And you seem to miss the point that IT IS ILLEGAL for them to get into the speed enforcement buisness at all. It doesn't matter if its in there contract if its illegal for it to be there in the first place!
Move to a state where the speed limit is over 70mph. :)
Taking into consideration that the standard formula for driving is 20 over Posted... I typically get away with between 90 and 100, and people are still passing me.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
There is a lot that can be done with technology. The timing of traffic signals could be monitored so that no one gets stopped for a red light when there are no cars waiting for a red signal going the opposing way. Why stop traffic for no reason at 3am?
As to the original thread, I would NEVER use a debit card. That's just a license to have someone put their hand in my pocket! I will ONLY accept a credit card or a charge card from my bank, they can keep their f!@$ing debit cards!
7,500 gallons?!?! Are you smoking crack? That's 0.4 miles per gallon. Take a real belcher, like the Ford Excursion. It gets 24 highway.. That's 125 gallons.
Even my old 1979 Camaro, which got 10 mpg highway on premium because of a variety of 'enhancements' would only need 300 gallons..
.sig: Now legally binding!
Can they prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was indeed speeding? Speeding is technically a crime, so therefore would ACME have to prove to the courts that he was speeding, and if so, would it not be the State that collects the fine?
What a disturbing development.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
Or stop to go to the bathroom and buy a snack at one of those nice rest stops they have on the NY Thruway...
>>As speed doubles, impact force quadruples.
Wrong again.
The formula for momentum is P=m*v
P=momentum
v=velocity
m=mass
Try taking a jr. high school physics call before you post.
If you voted for Nader, THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT!!
Having grown up in Indiana and now being in Ohio.. I'd have to say the only real problems with Indiana drivers are speeding (where isn't that one) and cutting across a couple lanes (only in Indianapolis).
Ohio and Michigan on the other hands.. wow. Ohio drivers like driving slow in the left lane on the Interstate. In Toledo (where I live) red light running has been quite rampant -- even school busses! -- I'm quite sure I could have made it through some intersections before the red light runners. People also like turning from the wrong lanes. One spot is so bad I considered driving my old car in a loop where I kept going through this intersection to see how long until someone side-swiped me by turning into the wrong lane. I feel confident in saying there's no chance I'd have had to stop and get gas to keep it up.
Michigan overtook Tennessee long ago as the worst I'd see in the US. Michigan drivers will claim it's Detroit giving them the bad rap. While SE Michigan is pretty bad (speed limit = 70, I've gotten passed while going 95), it's all over the state. Like OH drivers, they (to use a term my friend coined for this) butt-pick in the left lane. They usually signal a lane change after making it. My absolute favorite happened in Traverse City. At a 3-way intersection, I could not go straight at a green light because not one, not two, but SIX cars across the yellow line. I had to sit through a couple green light cycles before finally turning in to a parking lot on the side so I could head out some other way. That would have been more interested had I not been borrowing a friend's car.. I was leary of pulling up to the first car in the wrong lane and starting to honk in someone else's car.
how true.
i had an experience w/ a stupid driver about 2 months ago, i was out picking up some grub at my local arby's, anyway, i was making a left hand turn (w/ my turn signal on) at a DEAD stop, and some dumb-bitch-with-an-suv-talking-on-a-cell-phone-an
thnx for listening.
E.
-
-
This Post has been brought to you by the letter "E".
Damn, she hit you at 50mph? Damn, you are extremely lucky that you and your passenger only had minor injuries, could have been a lot worse.
i n-fucking-lala-land bitch, while at a dead stop waiting to turn left. My friend and I were out getting food at Arby's.
As far as cell phones go, I'm unsure what I think needs to be done. Personally, I feel that it should fall under reckless driving. I'm hesitant about asking for MORE laws, but correctly enforcing the ones we currently have sure would help.
Hmmm... Funny thing, about two months ago, I was riding in someone's car and we were hit, at about 50 mph, by some not-paying-attention-speeding-in-her-big-ass-suv-
His little corolla was totalled, but we both only sustained minor injuries. What a coincidence that you had such a similar experience around the same time!
That's not the first time I've almost been killed like that though. About 6 months ago I was driving to work, and some jackass on a cell phone, was just staring off into nothing, completely oblivious to his surroundings while going into a turn, crossed the center line, and comes within an inch of hitting me. We were both doing about 50 going oposite directions on a two lane road, he looked up right at the last second and swerved.
Then there's been countless times when people on cell phones swerved into my lane without looking, or just swerved because they didn't even realize they were swerving.
So yeah, people are pretty damn stupid when it comes to driving. WTF is so hard to understand about 2+ tons of metal moving at 60+ MPH being extremely dangerous and requiring ALL of your attention?
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
check out the scary possibilities this company claims their airiq wireless apps can do:m l
http://www.airiq.com/text/fleets_rental_main.ht
... of you ass and find out what you are talking about for a minute. This system is clearly different that your system because, as the article says "...it also allows rental car agents to "manage driver behavior by auditing location information" and "receive boundary crossing and excessive speed reports." An agent can even shut a car off by remote control if it's going too fast or heading into territory it's not supposed to be in." Clearly there is a two way comunication here, but rather than reading enough of the article to know what the hell you are talking about you have to go and post crap like this. Thanks for contributing nothing. God I hate it when flamebait actually gets to me.
AussiePenguin
Melbourne, Australia
ICQ 19255837
Jeremy
Melbourne, Australia
Jabber Australia
My Garmin Legend (using WAAS) is "much" more accurate then 3 cars speedos I have tested (Saab, Volvo and a Ford). All three vehciles have OE sized tires. The worse offender is the Saab which is off apx 8 mph at 55mph. All confirmed using the local cops radar. Point is, driving a straight line I'd trust it over my cars speedo.
Most GPS(r) is receive only. Most don't transmit data (other then via rs232).
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
DSMs (That's Diamond Star Motors: Eclipses and Talons) have a fuel-cut programmed into their ECUs (Electronic Control Units) so that basically, when a combonation of gear/rpms is reached, the computer cuts fuel to the engine. This is mostly to keep you from destroying the engine, although it has the side effect of limiting speeds. Pisses off a lot of racers, but there are modified EEPROMS available to replace the factory one that has fuel cut removed.
Chances are, any government standard enacted would be done in firmware, which can be replaced relatively easily.
One: Counter to some arguments here, GPS still has the feature called 'Selective Availability', Clinton just had it set to ZERO introduced error. It could be restored in any time of need, even on a continent-by-continent basis (that's the Selective part). But even with the SA set to its 1997 levels, a good 12channel GPS receiver would calculate a typical Estimated Positional Error (EPE) that would STILL only introduce a variation of about 5mph instantaneous velocity at highway speeds. Now it's about 2mph error even if the sampled satellites are mostly coplanar.
Two, a lot of people are commenting about their GPS giving a freak "200mph" moment when the receiver goes under a bridge or around a rock. In the three years and 76000+ miles I've driven on Garmin GPS III and III+ receivers, I've never seen this happen. Good GPS units do some initial statistical smoothing: tossing out single obviously bizarre readings. Throw out anything with a magnitude of acceleration greater than a certain cutoff maximum, or throw out deviations that last less than a minimum overall time. And if the company's logging you, they can do even more smoothing. Sure, you hit 76pmh for 20sec, but if you're passing someone on the highway, that's normal. Obviously you didn't go from 55mph to 135mph in 0.5sec, just to return to 56mph.
Acceleration and position analysis can give the car companies MORE ways to judge your driving habits with their equipment. SURCHARGE FOR QTY (2) SPINNING "DONUT" MANEUVERS: $45 ea. SURCHARGE FOR QTY (3) SPRINTING MANEUVERS: $45 ea. SURCHARGE FOR QTY (5) PANIC BREAKING MANEUVERS: $45 ea.
Four, the obvious seems to have missed many people here: it's a contract, and if you don't like it, don't sign it. If they write in the contract YOU WILL BE BILLED A SURCHARGE IF OUR CAR DETERMINES YOUR DRIVING EXCEEDS SAFE LIMITS, then honor it. It's their car. They can do what they want to do with it, and put what restrictions they want to put on it. Almost all 4WD cars are rented with the provision: THIS 4WD CAR MUST ONLY BE OPERATED ON PAVED ROADS; OFF-ROAD EXCURSIONS ARE FORBIDDEN. They don't want to fix it after you break it. Same thing here.
[
How is Wiley Coyote ever going to catch Road Runner now - and he's ACMEs best customer.
How come you get to be "Insightful" and the parent of your message is a "Troll". Sheesh, get it around the right way folks.
Speeding is a VICTIMLESS crime, which should NOT be illegal.
So you mean all those ambulances carting stretchers from road accidents don't actually have people in them? And all those coffins of crash victims are empty?
Maybe it's just a big conspiracy. Maybe speeding really is victimless. I didn't realise.
And after I wasted a whole day going to my mate's funeral. Damn.
There are multiple lanes on the highway. Each lane is for passing the lane directly to the right of it. In many states, it is the law that you cannot drive in the leftmost lane without passing. It is STUPID drivers who didn't pay attention in the lousy driving schools, and glibly passed their exam that cause accidents. Also those that don't pay attention to the road (talking on the phone, playing with the radio or cruise control, etc). Also those that are simply assholes and do stupid things because they are pissed off at other drivers (like swerving in front of people while passing them, not using turn signals, etc).
Hello little man. I will destroy you!
Only 16 questions?! Well then, Pennsylvania obviously sucks. I mean, in Ohio they have 20 questions on the test--gotta weed out those bad drivers!
Seriously, though, the questions, like you say, are simple for idiots. The driving test in most areas doesn't go near the highway, they want to make sure you come to a complete stop at stop signs. Many drivers can't handle the highway, but are not even tested for it. The majority of drivers (that I see, at least) can't parallel park.
In addition, if you miss questions on the test, they don't correct you at all. They have _one_ version of the test and if they gave you the answers, anyone could pass. But you can pass with 4 answers wrong, and they don't even tell you what is incorrect!
While I was taking my driving test (6 years ago now), I saw someone run over three of the four traffic cones while doing the back-up test. They still got their license.
Hello little man. I will destroy you!
Speeding does NOT cause accidents. Accidents are caused by bad drivers and reckless driving.
The speed at which a vehicle is moving makes little or no difference when they hit something. Ever feel the difference between being hit at 55MPH and 75MPH? No, and you'd be lucky to survive either one. But the fact is that good drivers, those who know and are in control of their vehicle, know where it is on the road, know where the other vehicles are and can sense other drivers' intentions, will not get in an accident.
Those drivers who are incompetent, uneducated, unskilled, inexperienced, and/or senile cause accidents.
They are, of course, the ones driving slow in the passing lane.
They are the ones cutting off other drivers and not realizing it.
The ones changing lanes without a turn signal, or turning it on when they are already halfway in the lane.
The ones slowing down to a snail's pace twenty feet from a turn, without a turn signal.
Slowing down and even stopping when getting on the highway instead of speeding up.
Stopping while on the highway to let those who stopped on the ramp enter the highway.
Following too closely.
Who don't stop completely at stop signs.
Don't yield at a Yield sign.
Stop in the middle of the road because they don't know which way to turn.
Turn left at intersections where there is clearly a "NO LEFT TURN" sign and no turn lane.
Not checking their blind spot. (An interesting note: My wife insisted that there was no such thing. I had to show her. She had been driving for 8 years.)
Sorry, speeding is NOT the cause of accidents. Of course, those bad drivers have accidents, and the faster they are moving when it happens, the more damage they do. But if you handled the bad driving and revoked licenses from those unfit to drive (because of eyesight, competence, reflexes, drug/alcohol addiction), you remove the danger. Will it ever happen? No.
I agree with you on the mandatory driver re-testing. Everyone should get REAL driver tests, and it should be done without their knowledge (through observation), "every once in a while".
Hello little man. I will destroy you!
Anyway, a contract alone is not legally binding without an understanding of the content by both parties. If you're illiterate and I get you to sign a contract without explaining it to you, the contract is invalid.
There's nothing wrong with the policy. The problem was that the policy was not clearly stated.
If the policy ended up saving ACME a lot of money (recovering stolen cars, few accidents -> cheaper insurance) and they passed the savings on to me, sure I'd rent from them. I don't speed: Cheaper rentals would be awesome.
Bryan
c. don't drive incredibly recklessly
Whew! I'm glad recklessly is still ok.
"It's a rental."
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
It would be a little more work to figure out how the unit communicates with les gendarmes to, er, discover that it was defective.
Same thing about those lights on top of each car in Korea, that someone mentioned... I wonder why all those lights are still functional.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
Civil aviation uses GPS - a lot - for navigation. It's not just a toy for bored geeks in cars.
It's true that airliners will never navigate solely on GPS; a complete shut-down of GPS will not [should not] lead to any airliners crashing into mountains. However, too many private pilots do rely solely on GPS.
While global loss of GPS will not lead any airliners to mountains, it will lead to massive saturation of the system. For example, on Oceanic routes (trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific) having a GPS sensor allows you to meet a higher navigation performance rating which means you can use the preferred tracks.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
How do you drop an egg three feet, with no padding etc., and not have it break?
Drop it from a height of four feet.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
By law, those things have to trip not just for motorcycles, but for bicycles as well. Those sensors have a part that is the most sensitive; in enlightened states (California and Arizona are where I've seen them) they paint a little picture of a bicycle on the road where the sensor is most sensitive.
If you have a sensor in your town that doesn't trip for your bike (motorcycle or bicycle) be sure to write a letter of complaint to your local municipal authority. To calibrate these things I suspect the technician just moves his Chrysler LeBehemoth on the sensor instead of doing it right.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
Of course I'm sure that in some states (I won't name any names but just point to the southeastern part of the US) all vehicles - motor vehicles as well as bicycles - are equal, but some are more equal than others....
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
The voter revolt that would follow would be quite amusing.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Several intersections 'round here are also wired to take your picture if you run the red light.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
yes but the diffrence is that the money is already out of your pocket an you have to fight to get it back. With a CC you dont have to pay up at all.
.sigs suck, thus nothing here.
He doesn't. He's driving a bus with Sandra Bullock sitting on his lap.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
I'm sorry, but it's their property. If they don't want you using/abusing it in a certain way, then they have every right to hold you financially responsible when you violate their rules.
--
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
The only thing missing was a recording of my mother's voice yelling at me to slow down! Later Tony
WTF? Over?
We have a man who was informed on the contract that he signed that he would be fined $150 for each incident of speeding with their vehicle. He was informed that there was a tracking system installed on the van. What's his excuse? He glossed over the statements
I mostly agree with you: but I think that ACME could get burned for not making a new provision noticable enough on the contract. From what I remember of contract law back in university, a company has to make it very clear what you are agreeing to on a contract. That's why the most controversial clauses in a contract often require a separate initial to prove that you read that clause. Especially when am standard contract is altered, as seems to be in this case.
I support the move of rental agencies to track speeds via GPS (potentially it would save lives as well as reduce rental fees) -- but they need to make it clear in the contract. Contracts that are designed to trick people never stand up in court.
-rt-
-rt-
** Evil Canadians are taking over the world. Learn about the conspiracy
Buy a car that comes stock with 'Z' rated tires, and you get a car with no limiter, or a 149MPH limiter.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
yep, every time i run that 5 minute long redlight at 4 am when there is no one else awake. I'm definitely running the risk of killing someone. I'm surprised I haven't killed hundreds.
"Weasling out of work is important to learn; it is what separates humans from animals. Except for weasels."
Obviously this GPS method won't be used outside of rental agencies, since it's a nasty invasion of privacy when applied to a user-owned vehicle. But there are plenty of non-invasive ways to issue speeding tickets that could do the same job.
My personal favorite idea, that as far as I know is not currently in use anywhere (I really should patent it instead of posting), is Turnpike speed timing. Most toll roads give you a card with a magnetic stripe on it. Hook all the exits up to a central network time server, imprint entry time on the card, read time at exit.
Divide the distance between exits by the elapsed time, and issue speeding tickets accordingly. Note that this won't actually catch a lot of people, but it will produce a nice increase in concession sales at the turnpike's rest stops -- smart speeders would opt to hang out at Wendy's for half an hour to get under the limit.
No, they aren't. Urban Legend.
Its NEVER happened. Not yet anyway.
Poor little no puppy toe!
http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?3357354385
Uh-huh. You may want to send that to www.snopes.com then, since THEY insist that it doens't happen, and they're leading source for debunking Urban Legends.
Send them your ticket, and proof that you got it FROM the toll operator at the turnpike, and they'll happily recinde their statement that it has not ever happened.
Poor little no puppy toe!
http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?3357354385
Some states have photo-radar traps that work on a similar principal When the radar gun shows you exceeding the preset limit, it pops a picture. They send you the summons, picture with time/date/speed stamp on it and your sunk. I beleive this isn't considered legal tho in some states. That's why it's not wide spread Pete
Pete
Wether or not they time you, if you use it to commit a crime, at least in NY, they can use the timestamps to help pin down where you were in court.
Pete
I guess that this curious policy will end as soon as some customer sues them for giving her/him a car that can exceed the speed limit - thus encouraging him/her to break the law...
I've gotten one before on the Ohio Turnpike. Took a picture of the license plate and mailed me the ticket.
90 is rarely a safe speed, and certainly not for older people or inexperienced teenage drivers.
And as one of the most dangerous things on the highway is when people are moving at wildly different speeds from each other, you have to pick a speed that accomodates all the people you'll be allowing to drive.
Never ridden on the autobahn have you? It's quite normal for people going 180km/h to pass trucks going 80-100km/h. There are 18 year olds and 75 year olds on the same road doing 150km/h. In many areas there are no speed limits, but on more dangerous parts there are.. and the limits vary from area to area. It works quite well and is fairly safe.
However, it's also not easy to get a license in Germany.. about a thousand dollars in classes and something like a 4 hour driving test (I think this differs from state to state).
----
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I got a ticket in the mail with a nice picture showing my car, license plate prominent, going through a red light in Brooklyn.
This reminds me of a comedian who was talking about the police in L.A. putting up photo-speed traps. He said, "I got a picture of my car and license plate in the mail with a ticket, so I sent them a picture of $50." He said, "Two weeks later, they sent me a picture of handcuffs. I sent in the money right away."
"Not exactly...."
---
/bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
Good Samaritan laws are the exception, not the rule, in the US. In most jurisdictions, there is no affirmative duty to aid another. However, anything you do must be "reasonable" (in the legal sense). If I watch you drowning, I have no duty to help you. However, if I start to rescue you, I must be "reasonable." I can't start to rescue you, have you rely on my rescue attempt (by, for example, stop asking others for help), and then abandon the attempt for no reason.
Q:How many libertarians does it take to stop a Panzer division? A:None. Obviously market forces will take care of it.
I think you are confused by the phrase "contains illegal acts." A contract can make reference to an illegal act. However, a contract cannot require the *performace* of an illegal act. In this example, the contract is requiring the van renter to *not perform* an illegal act. No problem there. There are many contracts that have clauses requiring that certain illegal acts not be performed. Many so-called "morals clauses" in endorsement contracts, for example, contain these provisions. (They also typically contain many more provisions for legal acts that the contractor doesn't want you to do because it would reflect poorly on the product. I believe there was a clause like this in the endorsement contract between the Beef Council and Cybil Sheppard. Ms. Sheppard announced she was a vegetarian in some interview. Whoops.)
Q:How many libertarians does it take to stop a Panzer division? A:None. Obviously market forces will take care of it.
people try to steal our cars and take them to Mexico, EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I have checked out AirIQ's website and it looks like they're using cellphones to contact the base station, to transmit telemetry data gathered from the GPS receiver.
I used to work with the development of such tracking devices and cellular technology turned out to be a solution only if there's sufficient coverage of the cellular phone network. However, in Europe, where GSM has become commonplace, that is no problem. If you can get there by car, you can rest assured there's coverage. Roaming agreements between nationwide operators provide seamless coverage across the border.
So, how's that situation in the US? How well does a cellphone work in unpopulated areas? How well across the Mexican border?
-brinkie
Omnis basim vester nobis compete sunt.
One of our scientists just came from England, where there's a project to limit the speed of vehicles. Here's a link to information on the project.
There has been a similar project in The Netherlands. Follow this link.
It's based on GPS reception and digital mapping, basically the same technology as the car rental company used. But this is a one way communication only, since the interaction (speed limiting) takes place in the vehicle.
Maybe this is a lot better than fining your customer, just set a speed limit and you'll never get pulled over by a cop for speeding. But then again, how does the system detect work zones?
-brinkie
Omnis basim vester nobis compete sunt.
Actually...
I have heard that they do indeed watch for speeding. You miss the other benefit of this. While overall efficiency is reduced by not speeding, it is only by a tiny amount.
The trade off then? Lower insurance rates. I have heard (can anyone verify) that they get a break on their insurance if they install GPS for this reason.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
He didn't say "head on" he said "oncomming" which just means "comming towards me".
A truck that has lost its breaks and is comming quickly down towards you at 60 MPH, from behind, is just as "oncomming" as one comming head on.
Either way, you had better do some sort of accelerating in some direction or other pretty quickly
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
hmmm the system I was taught in my safe driving course was SIPDE (it was an MSF certified motorcycle course) Scan Identify Predict Decide Execute.
Note, stop i snot one of the steps.
A driver should be ready to take WHATEVER ACTION NEEDED to avoid an accident. Thats the decide step. Sometimes you avoid it by speeding up, sometimes by slowing down.
If the car to the right of me suddenly starts comming into my lane, I have a semiu behind me, and the next lane over has a car in it, but enough room for me to acelerate out and come in in front o fhim....
Guess what I am gonna do? It certainly isn't going to be "brake hard and hope the guy in the Mack truck is paying attention".
We are talking accident avoidance here, not what to do if an accident is eminent. These are two different things.
In fact, in both my MSF course, and my previous drivers ed, we learned that accident avoidance is alot more than just braking and there are many situations where you want to swerve and possibly accelerate to get out of bad situations.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Eh some do, some don't.
Lots of the lights around here are tripped just fine by my bike. There are a coupl ehowever that I have to run eevery single time (at night anyway).
Of course, I don't really think o fit as "running the light". Its more like treating it as a stop sign.
In any case the rules are silly. I don't need to come to a full stop at a stop sign, I just need to slow down enough that I can see if anything is comming and come to a full stop if needed.
The laws make a good general guide for safe driving, sure. However they arn't the be all and end all. Theres alot fo things that are perfectly safe and still break the law.
Some (like running the light at the corner of harvard and maine in medofrd MA) are impossible to not break
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Course thne there are some lights that don't EVER change unless their sensor detects a car, and the damned sensor wont detect a motorcycle.
COme one up to boston and id be happy to show you 2 or 3 like that.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Please...if thats your attitude, and you REALLY want to not kill people, then stay oin the fucking right lane.
There are few things more dangerous than people who sit around doing lsow speeds in the left lanes of a highway.
All the mor eagressive faster drivers slow down. They get pisse doff because you are going slow in the left lane - the lane that is generally considered the fast lane. Then they have to try to get around your self-rightous ass.
The manuver of trying to get around involves changing lanes and passing. This is easily more dangerous than speeding. People who drive with thsi smug "you shouldn't be going that fast anyway" attitude are the ones who kill people.
driving fast in straight clear lane is pretty damned safe in and of itself.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
DO me a favor. Get a motorcycle. Go to medford MA. From Boston Ave, go down Harvard Street at 3 am and come up to the corner of Main and Harvard alone.
Once you have done that THEN you may tell me that there is "no promise,ever, in running a red light" and I will consider your opinion to be at least potentially informed.
If this test is too hard for you geographically, then head to the local bike shop and ask them which traffic light sensors in the area are so out of whack that anything less than a mack truck will have trouble being noticed on them - try one of those.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Hmmm your notion of death must be quite odd if you think it is possible for one to enter the loop after death.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
It's definitely a sad situation where the law is so frequently violated, because it tends to promote a casual attitude toward the law, albeit in a specific instance.
However, if I am generally permitted to modify my respect for the law in that particular instance, then why not another (such as $FAVORITE_VICTIMLESS_CRIME), and another ?
Conversely, why not make a whole slew of arbitrary laws and give the police complete discretion to arrest anyone they deemed fit?
I recall reading once in Car & Driver (a forum where speed limits are roundly thumped and criticized as infernal impediments to spirited driving) that some kind of study had been conducted (perhaps by the U.S. Department of Transportation?) indicating that the "best" speed limit was one which 80% of the drivers obeyed naturally.
BTW, commercial vehicles have lived under the yoke of GPS monitoring for some years. I once saw a setup in a dark room with a bunch of servers and a projection screen showing a map of the city with locations of passenger delivery vans equipped with GPS and radio transmitters. If any driver lingered too long on an unscheduled stop, the Powers That Be would know.
However, I think such monitoring evokes a love-hate relationship with the long-haul trucking industry, since greater fundamental efficiency is achieved by speeding (not to mention other less than legal behaviors, such as use of amphetamine and driving more than 16 hours/day.) I haven't heard of any GPS equipped truckers being turned in for speeding as a result of this monitoring.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
You hit resonance with that gripe.
After contending with, shall we say, less than ideal, "drivers" on the road, I've often thought it would be beneficial to have unmarked cars roving around with trained observers from the local motor vehicle authority doing real time grading of current driver's license holders.
Gleefully do I think of the consequences of such grading on my pet peeves, such as Joe Turtle slowing down at 0.1 nano-gees in the leftmost fastlane on a crowded boulevard to make an illegal left turn where there is No Fscking Left Turn Bay, while 15 cars pile up behind him. Joe, take 10 demerits and an increased insurance rate for driving in a manner to decrease safety and to decrease the overall efficiency of traffic flow.
Oh, and Patsy GottaGetThereNow who speeds past you, slips in just ahead of you in the nick of time so she can immediately and drastically slow down just barely in time to make a sharp right, treating you and your vehicle to extra braking and acceleration, when she could just as well have pulled in behind you and performed the same maneuver saving you the hassle at the cost of 15 picoseconds of her precious time. Five demerits, Patsy!
"Provided by the management for your protection."
* the printer worked fine, but I didn't like the output quality and it was slow as dirt (even on "shit quality" level). But there's no way in hell I'm paying a business for customer satisfaction, which I hear used to be (gasp!) free.
-Legion
He agreed to the contract--whether he read it carefully or not--when he signed it.
-Legion
Or do you not know how retailers handle returns through the manufacturers?
-Legion
And--you had no way to know this with the information I gave initially--I only bitched for half a minute. The underpaid guy helping me offered to waive it because he knew what a stupid policy it was. He understands the nature of repeat business; unfortunately, I won't be going there anyway because the policy is still in place.
-Legion
At 5:00am it's the quickest way to get downtown, because nobody's on the side roads.
But any other time of day, it's jam-packed with traffic because every time you have one stinking car waiting on the side road, the light changes and dozens of cars pile up on the main road to wait for him to make that right-hand turn...
The Web is like Usenet, but
the elephants are untrained.
Most traffic signals use induction loops to detect cars. Essentially an AC signal is sent through a wire loop in the pavement. Putting a big hunk of metal on it changes the impedance. Nothing to do with weight.
Now that the 55 mph speed limit is gone, I don't seen anyone saying "Drive 55 - it's not the law, but it's a good idea." In other words, their concern for safety turned out to be merely a slave's concern with obeying his master's orders.
You claim that 'speeding' is unsafe. If a man drove 70 mph every day down the same highway from 1970 to today, it would have been 'unsafe' in the 70's and 'safe' today because we've raised the speed limit.
The only questionable part is that people can ask: "Where is the 'proof' that they guy was speeding?". Well guess what, you don't need proof. Having the privatly-owned GPS unit read 90 mph is not going to get you a state-issued fine, it won't get you arrested, and you won't be given points on your license. Since this is a private business issue, *they* set the terms of what is acceptable proof in the contract. If you don't like it, fuck off and go to another company. Welcome to capitalism.
Of course, I don't read contracts that often and I speed like hell also, but if I'm caught, I'm caught. I pay the fine, learn from my mistakes, and it doesn't happen again.
It is all about the simple fact that:
* Laws are choices, and laws can be changed
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a proven strategy for traffic-safety
* "Speed-control" is not in any way a cause to encourage traffic-safety, it is just a way to collect money (ie tickets)
Within our civilization we have certain different people:
* "It's the best for us" - people whom trust the government;
* "Well I wouldn't speed if the fine is so high" - people whom are scared;
* "Well I'll speed as I want to" - they compulsive anarchist, or maybe some other form of anti-governmental protesting;
Fact is that a car gives freedom, and limiting speed is taking away freedom, this is the social problem with speed, ie nobody wants unsafe roads right?
The government is all about power, here in Holland we see that our government doesn't have the power they want, so via speeding tickets they try "to do something for a good cause" while becoming obscenely rich, and proving their power to civilization. The GPS system found in the above article is for rental cars, here in Holland they want to introduce a license plate with a chip. This chip makes contact with all sorts of electronic devices, but you know what's going to happen here. First we pay extra fines because we drive on a highway at the wrong moment (a policy against heavy traffic), then they check the distance we've drivven (important for taxes), then they check what speed we make.
At this moment, guns are highly forbidden within our country, but I'm sure if these big brother systems are introduced, a lot of police people are going to die, I'm not in favour of this, but this is the way it works here.
--
Bizar technology?
It doesn't happen often, perhaps once every few months or so, but when it does I can go a mile or two in just a second, and in that case would I be speeding?
--
Free Mac Mini
He should have known about this before hand. He didn't read his contract. It's his own damn fault.
--
Free Mac Mini
--
Free Mac Mini
Some of the golf courses I have played at use a gps system in the carts
so you know how far you are from the hole, what's
up ahead of you etc.
It's great for that but it also lets the club house see when you leave
the cart paths, which on a rainy day gets the marshall called out on you,
and can turn a fun day of doing donuts into banishment from the club.
Damn technology!
He meant that he was passing on a two lane highway, and an oncoming truck suddenly appeared. You need a burst of speed to clear the other car and get back in the right lane.
in most states to get a speeding ticket the officer has to get a reading on his radar gun confirming your speed. Whether or not the gps calls the cops, if the cop cant clock you over the speed limit, he cannot write you a ticket.
more than likely if the gps is malfunctioning and alerting cops, you are going to see lawsuits agains the gps manufacturers for wasting the resources of the police, not consumers having to defend traffic tickets.
Yeah I agree. Other drivers should be able to relate a bad impression of your driving if you cut them off or do something stupid. A horn doesn't always cut it and how do you get a plate number (let alone remember it) when you're just trying to avoid a collision?
Regarding lock-downs, rental companies and high end cars have been using cell-modems to communicate with the cars directly, including position info and total lock-down/shut-off commands in reported cases of theft, etc. Heck, in some places they even leave the keys in hanging in the key hole of the trunk while the cars are parked in the rental car lots.
You can laugh without eating a sandwhich, but you can do both if bring one.
Fight this if you can.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The real money is in toll roads. With good enough GPS, any road can be a toll road. Drive here and be a patron of the local DOT. The Transportation magazines are full of this kind of thing, and local governments are drooling at the prospects. It would both raise revenues and lower costs by pushing them onto everyone. It's on the way!
Like the identification papers in your back pocket (invasive!) and break tags, GPS recievers can be made a condition of road usage.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Having had more than my share of speed tickets (all for going a 5-10 MPH over the limit), I'm starting to desire a little box in my car which reads for me all the speed limits (e.g. receiving radiowaves on a a special frequency ) and flashes or beeps or something when I don't respect them (I swear, most of thime I don't _see_ them).
Ciao
----
FB
This is why I only use my debit/ATM card when the purchase is the "thank you very much and I'm out the door" kind, such as a grocery store or book store. Whenever you give someone a string of numbers that allows them to take your money, you're inviting trouble; MCI doesn't need direct access to my bank account. I'd bet my checking balance that this guy now feels the same way about car rental places.
"Understand you're having a little Jimmy Page trouble."
Just as with recreational drugs, the right answer is to change the fekking laws. Remember when Montana was "reasonable and prudent"? That meant two things: (1) it took a real person at the scene of the crime to make it a crime, and (2) your true status was a judgement call, and you had to show your judgement was better than the professionals.
States are too chicken-scat to use such a "judgement-based" law because the fekking lawyers can fight the judgement issue all day long. That's why we have zero-tolerance laws, because no one wants to use their judgement anymore.
Bottom line, don't dis the man for enforcing your legislatures laws, dis the legislature for passing them, then vote the mutha-fekkers out and get some real back in. Just flashing the intellectual property, knowwhatumsayin?
In addition, speed limits are for public roads. If I own a farm, there's nothing prohibiting me from putting a few dirt roads on it and tearing it up at 150mph. I wouldn't rent a car to do this, but it's not illegal!
El Karma: excelente(principalmente la suma de moderación hecha a los comentarios de los usuarios)
The proposed system in England is a active system. If you're in a 30 zone, then you can't go above 30. If you're in a 55 zone, then you can't go above 55.
I work for a transportation research laboratory. One of our scientists just came from England, where there's a project to limit the speed of vehicles. Here's a link to information on the project.
Just goes to show that corporations believe they are above the public law. They can impose fines just like the government, without any due process or respect for your rights as a citizen because they are a corporation.
The government lets this go on since it is private business, but the corporations have us over a barrel. They control our credit, howe we work, a great deal of our lives without regard to the protections that our laws give us that the government has had to follow.
Now that corporations take over more and more the daily part of our lives, the very existence of our ability to live, our freedoms and protections will decrease since they are free from these messy due process, constitutions, and the like.
Nuff rant...
but if they could have one for failure to use a turn signal, I'd be all for it!
Kinda funny you mention it. Just today, I was sitting in traffic and I thought to myself; If I was a cop, I would become known as the 'turn signal cop'.
I would spend my entire traffic duty pulling over people that do not use the signal for lane changes and turns. I would also follow all cell-phoners until they do something stupid and then pull them over for that...
I never make space for someone to come over to my lane if they neglect to signal. But if they signal, no problemo. It is unfortunate that where I live, people are so aggresive that if you do use your signal to change lanes, people will speed up just to block you...
Does anyone else worry about a rental company tracking everywhere you go, or do they claim that they are only checking the rate you get there?
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
I've actually found that it's more accurate than the speedometer in my car at high speeds.
Compared to what? How do you know which is more accurate? Just wondering?
mrAhah! I didn't consider that (although I have done that myself on a trip or two). Just keepin' ya honest. :)
mrThe hell "it isn't about the money". Add another risk to using a debit card to rent a car! If he had used a credit card, he could dispute the charge. Since he used a debit card, the rental agency was able to take the $450 without giving the renter a chance to dispute the charge. Sounds a bit like a scam to me. I'd want details - like a complete log of my speed and location during the period the car was in my posession. If they couldn't produce that, I doubt my credit card company would argue with my dispute. Oh, and about the "transmission to satellites" thing? GPS doesn't but the tracking device they use may very well uplink location information to a satellite. That's how they find those stolen trucks so fast.
Although.. If you make sure there's a car beside you when you speed under a camera, there will be two cars on the picture, and will get discarded, because they don't know which one was speeding.
You can also of course just ruin every camera you see, a sport becoming more and more popular in the Netherlands, for obvious reasons.
Leto.
<grub> Reading
If I drive on, say, a private road, there is no speed limit. Is "speeding" in their contract, or is "speed over 90 MPH" in their contract?
Another interesting question is how these things work (whether it is tied to the speedometer or not). I would assume it is not, in which case "Your P.O.S. car broke down and I had it towed. Talk to the tow truck driver."
If it is tied to the spedometer somehow, then there's the "I got stuck in the mud" claim. If it's monitored by both, the tow truck excuse would still work, but you'd have to say it was being pulled and the moron truck driver left it in gear.
There's always the innocent untill proven guilty thing too (Someone stole it, drove it. I found it on my own without making a police report. You can't prove it was me).
All of these do sound rather silly, but it certianly reiterates the fact that an actual police officer didn't catch you, and instead a computer, which isn't all that accurate, did.
Well, that is why I'd pay the 5 bucks extra and rent Hertz instead. You can do anything with their cars.
Not if they put the gps inside your head...
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
The main purpose of the system is to quickly locate and recover rental cars that don't come back. But it has many other uses. One is that it allows rental companies to rent to non credit card holders. Another is enforcing travel-area restrictions.
Law enforcement apparently hasn't discovered this yet; it's too new. But that will happen.
Acutally, properly bumpy concrete for better traction. :-)
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
yeah, those damn propagandists! Using the real world consequences of your childish selfish actions against you. Why, the actaul truth of what inevitably happens when people drive drunk is just so intellectually dishonest. Bizzare ramblings about slippery slopes and camera's in your bedroom and OH MY GOD IT'S 1984 ANY MINUTE NOW!!!!! are such a non emotional, rational way to hold a debate about actually enforcing public safety laws.
Do you have any idea how rediculous you sound to someone who isn't a fellow paranoid libertopiest? Honestly, you're probably a politically savy libertarian's worst nightmare. "emotional stories of people getting killed" and violation activated traffic camera's are gonna lead to big brother in our homes? And you wonder why you aren't taken seriously...
Kahuna Burger
...will work for Chick tracts...
OK, if this whole driving at night/motorcycle thing is a real concern, and not just a smokescreen agaisnt the idea (which is what the orriginal message really looked like), its not a big deal.
1) if the sensors for the light change can't feel your motorcycle, why would the ones for the camera? I would think it would be easiest to use the same sensor.
2) even at night, no matter how deserted you assume it is, you must still stop at the light at least long enough to look both ways. To do otherwise is selfish, dangerous and stupid. This isn't "Night of the Comet" there are plenty of other people out there who like to go driving (and walking) late at night too. So if you hear about these starting in your area (and you will hear about it if you bother to keep up with your local politics) write, call or go to a hearing and recomend that all lights that are rigged with these cameras also be upgraded with late night triggers as well.
3) failing that, in some states I believe it is legal to treat a red light as a stop sign under some conditions - if you have come to a full stop and can see clearly in both directions and see no oncoming traffic, you can cross. Find out what the guidelines are on this in your community and argue that those sort of exceptions should be accounted for in the enforcement of camera tickets.
Anyway, these are pretty small exceptions to a IMHO really good idea. Where I live, cars are running lights in busy pedestrian intersections in the middle of the day. If I was lucky enough that one of these programs started where I live and people started bringing up these "sob stories" I'd either laugh at them, or suggest the above solutions, depending on how obnoxious they were being. And anyone bringing up the "big brother" schtick would get a response that would likely sprain my condesension gland.
Kahuna Burger
...will work for Chick tracts...
No, he wasn't, but you're coming pretty close.
Maybe you really were just asking out of intelectual interest, but the general climate on this newsgroup has been that people have some god given right to break the law and endanger other people. Just look at the other responses before you shoot your mouth off.
Kahuna Burger
...will work for Chick tracts...
A car is running the red light
You are in the interesction. You realize that if you dont FLOOR it and accelerate much faster than your going you wont make it. Braking could leave you in the intersection of the speeding semi whose breaks have went out and is coming down a hill. Good enough?
Stop watch and mile markers....
My car has this little needle that tells me how fast I'm going.
For one thing, it's not perfectly calibrated. Speedometers can and do drift from spec. For another, the speedometer measures only the angular velocity of the wheels, not the "magnitude of the linear velocity of the vehicle with respect to the ground" which is closer to the accepted definition of vehicle speed; the relationship between the two values involves multiplication by a so-called constant, namely the radius of the wheels, which can be changed (e.g. larger or smaller tires).
Will I retire or break 10K?
Maybe the solution for you would be to stop crossing on the red, or is that too revolutionary?
You can't handle the truth.
One of my friends was sideswiped at 4 AM by someone who ran a stop sign way out in the country. It was just lucky she wasn't hurt. The guy ran the stop sign every morning; if you run stop signs/red lights all the time, eventually you are going to hit someone.
If they really wanted to catch people speeding they should install tachometers into every vehicle.
Network Security: It always comes down to a big guy with a gun.
This tracks separate incidents of excess speed.
Does that mean if you rev it up to 90 for ten minutes, then drop down to 55 for ten seconds and then back up to 90, you get fined twice?
If this *really* isn't about money, then there would be a single fee for exceeding the limit. That would add a lot of credibility the rental agent's story. I just fear what happens next... when they start reporting this information back to your insurance company!
These people looked deep into my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.
Once again, someone fails to realize that just because we CAN do a thing, it doesn't necessarily follow that we MUST do this thing.
This article is so full of horseshit, it makes me want to laugh... The rental agent claiming that it's about public safety, and not money? Is $150 what most people would call a mild deterrent?
Then there's the fact that it tracks you across state lines. Even a state trooper doesn't have the right to ticket you for speeding violations just across the state line.
Also, the article mentions that the system allows the agent to set a particular 'safe' speed on each car. Suppose the agent decides 55 is the safe speed... Do they fine you for going 65 in a 70? No mention is made of whether ACTUAL speed zones are linked to the GPS data to determine if you were ACTUALLY breking the law. That could be even scarier, since speed zones change and data in geographic systems can sometimes be incorrect... How many times a week does a site like MapQuest steer someone wrong?
Yes, we're that much closer to big brother, and once again, we see that it is the corporate world who will bring him to life. Even if we disregard, for a moment, the threat to the constitutional right to privacy and the issues of contract law, the government by rights SHOULD step in NOW in a BIG WAY to put a stop to this. It usurps power from a countless number of state and municipal authorities. Then, supposing you DO get a 'real' ticket from the local PD, you get home and you're fined by the rental car agency? Can we say 'double jeopardy'?
These people looked deep into my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.
Like this?
But it's not a ticket!! The contract quite clearly stated that he would be fined, and he was. But he did NOT recieve a ticket! No points on his licence, no auto insurance hike, just $150. Perfectly fair and legal, it's his own dumbass fault for not reading what he signed.
Cell phones should NOT be banned from cars! True, some simple-minded people can't handle it, but what about those who can? If I can drive perfectly fine while talking on a cell phone, and have been for years without any incident, but then a law is passed about it, I become a criminal........ where is the justice in that? If you kill someone because it's icy out and you didn't break soon enough at a light, or if you kill someone because you weren't paying attention due to a cell phone, it's still your fault! and it's the same outcome for the victim, thus it should be the same punishment!
You're right, PIs can't search because they don't own your house. The rental companies own the car, and stated in the contract that they would do that, wether or not they put a big red arrow to it is irrelevant, people should read what they sign!! It's that simple!
On what grounds is it illegal for them to get into the speed enforcement business? These are thier cars, and you are on their contract to use them! It's perfectly legal, it's just stupid people who don't read what they sign, and then throw a temper tantrum like the guy in the article that make this such a big deal! And as for your apartment, if your landlord put in your rent agreement that he could at anytime search your apartment for crack, and you signed it, you are SOL. And finally, You bring up PIs in your own comment, but by your logic, what they do would be illegal too, because it is a "police power"
I think that this is a good thing to do. It's not like they are keeping tabs on where you go and fineing you for going into bad parts of town. By doing this you are (somewhat) less likely to speed. If you don't speed, there is a smaller chance of you being in/causing an accident. If less rental car drivers cause accidents, then the company's insurance goes down and they don't have to take cars out of service as often.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
If the government tried to mount a gps on every car and mail people tickets, they'd certainly think it was in error when they say my 1/4 mile times!
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
BMW M5 - end of discussion -
- To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion -
This is EXACTLY the situation I thought about when I saw this. Oh great! The insurance company will put this in my car and monitor it and know my every move. How fast I go. Where I go, when and how often.
Not only is this an invasion of privacy, I would suspect I would get worse insurance rates than I am getting now instead of better. It's just another form of insurance discrimination.
I just wonder how many suckers they got to sign up for this "DEAL"
I have a handheld unit that I use on my boat and in my truck. It's pretty good for what I want it for which is basic navigation. After a recent trip I looked at the page that shows all the statistics such as average speed, total time, max speed, etc. It showed my max speed for the trip as being 89 mph which is at least 20 over what I was doing at any given time. (I don't think I could go 89 while towing my boat -- my truck doesn't have the balls.) I suspect that what happened is it switched satellites and got a different fix on my position -- which it then interpreted as actual movement. It would truly suck to get fined based on that...
"Driving a car is not an illegal offense until your speed passes the posted limit."
Even then, it is only a CIVIL offence, not a CRIMINAL offence. This way the government can fine you and you don't have your right to trial by jury, etc. Civil offences are considered minor infractions, not serious crimes.
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers. Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2
but stupid drivers do.
I'm not sure I like the fines for speeding; but if they could have one for failure to use a turn signal, I'd be all for it!
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
In our case, we do NOT bill the customer for violations. We merely stop renting to them, after a warning. We are always eager to collect actual damages if something happens; however, in cases like this, we (the company I do work for) are content to merely stop renting.
However, I can state that it takes at least a half-hour to an hour's worth of time to deal with each incident...when you consider a high ranking management official, or semi-management offical, who has a cost to the company of $18-$29/hour, needs to review the case, review the rental, and fill out paperwork to the parent corporation explaining why we want this person on the do-not-rent list (the decision to stop renting to someone, while straightforward, is NEVER made lightly), and mailing the letter, there is a clear cost involved. It is reasonable to expect that other rental companies would either
a. seek to recoup their liability expenses from people who abuse the contract
and more often
b. hope that the deterent effect of the penalty will discourage the behavior.
We don't want people to speed in our cars (I speed in my car, in the middle of the desert. That's my choice, and I must live with the consequences). We have penalties for OTHER things built into our contracts, to cover our expenses and deter behavior we do not desire. However, we do NOT like to enforce those penalties -we'd rather keep the customer happy. This is NOT a feel-good customer relation bullshit statement - if it was, I'd mention the name of the company. We genuinely do not want to piss people off - but we'd rather piss someone off than see one of our cars in a risky situation, or incur expenses fixing someone else's mess.
Other companies may not be as ethical as mine. Some companies enjoy making money off of hidden charges. It depends on the company, the local management, etc. Your mileage may vary.
People do take our cars to Mexico and then claim that they are stolen. It becomes a police matter, and more often than not, these idiots implicate themselves under questioning. And, remember, ACME is not charging for a crime, but rather a contract violation. There is a distinction. And MY company does NOT charge for the speeding - we send out warnings, and then yank the rental rights. And, I approve of that. I have no problem billing a customer for expenses, after the fact (when we find the car's been damaged, etc). Our contract, along with every other rental contract, gives us that right. However, for this type of violation, I do not approve, from a customer service standpoint, of the practice of charging a penalty for speeding. I do, however, support their right to do so. Important distinction.
and...it works.
Several points have been brought up, which need to be addressed:
1. There's "no appeals process". Wah. This is not a court of law, this is a contract. We agree to let you use a car. If you use it in a means against our contract, you owe us more $$$. Don't like it? Pay the higher rates to rent from some other agency that is busy paying high overhead because all of their cars are getting stolen.
We get sued, every day, by people who have been injured by people who have rented cars from us, and that's WITH our stringent qualifications. Think the machine goofed? Sue us. We'll bring the records to court. People wreck our cars, EVERY SINGLE DAY, people try to steal our cars and take them to Mexico, EVERY SINGLE DAY.
2. We are a private business, protecting our interest. However, I would vehemently fight any government effort to use this technology to keep track of citizens. For those people who have been getting "red light traffic tickets", I don't know about other states, but here in Arizona we have a bunch of those monitoring things (photo radar, etc). A lot of people throw the mailed tickets into the trash. Why? They have a lot of threatening language on them, saying "you are subject to arrest if you don't respond, blah blah blah", but they don't tell you that superior/civil & city court rules here mandate that certified mail, regular mail, etc, DO NOT CONSTITUTE service of the complaint - to be valid, the ticket must be given to you by a police officer, officer of the court, process server, etc, within 120 days of the date of the incident. Consequently, in Maricopa County you can throw those tickets away because they can't afford to send process servers after everyone (although Mesa has tried it a few times). Don't believe me? Fine. Go read the court rules on what constitutes service of the complaint yourself.
3. Back to AirIQ - on several occasions, we've had cars stolen, turned off the ignition remotely (rather, we set it so that the car can't be started again once stopped - it would be a Bad Thing(tm) to shut off a speeding vehicle with the requisite loss of power steering confusing an already drug-addled car thief), called the cops, had them circle the car, and take them away. We get our car back, the bad guys don't know what happened, and dozens of innocent pedestrians are happy instead of being smashed to pulp during a car chase. More boring for the TV news copters, but oh well.
4. We get reports when these things cross into Mexico. We then stop renting to these people, who try to cram 20 illegal aliens into a minivan and drive them across the desert.
5. There's a lot more to this system than the GPS crap. As stated previously, we can also shut the car off remotely.
6. Have you READ our contracts? There's tons of stuff in there, but it boils down to:
a. don't drive it drunk
b. don't loan it out to other people
c. don't drive incredibly recklessly
d. don't take it off road or to Mexico
e. don't rob any banks
f. you are responsible for the car (if it gets wrecked, damaged,etc). if you have insurance, great. but, we're gonna bill ya if anything happens, or if we have good evidence that you violated the above terms.
Don't like these terms? Fine. Show us a way to make money without them. We can't. Unlike other products, we're not just giving you something, we lay our asses on the line, liability wise, every time we do a rental.
AirIQ is wonderful for protecting our assets, and if you don't like it, rent from some other company. I say this as someone who works occasionally with a rental car company. As a private citizen, I believe that this level of detailed monitoring would be inappropiate for privately owned property that you own - i.e., the government should not be allowed to do this.
We routinely send notices out (we don't actually bill $$$) to people who exceed 90 MPH for 60 seconds (we understand that sometimes people have to speed a LOT to pass) saying, "do it again and we won't rent to you anymore".
We don't bill them, it's not worth the trouble for us, we just put them on the do not rent list. We do, however, have the right to put charges on the credit card, i.e., cleaning fees.
A company can put any charge they want on your cc if you sign a contract allowing them to.
7. Someone mentioned "this would make the rental car company an accessory" - not true. Speeding is generally a CIVIL violation, although there is also criminal speeding; however, the rental car company in this case is not enforcing a law, but rather collecting a penalty for violating our contract. The action may have violated a civil law, but an entity is not obligated to report civil violations. And, there is not enough evidence to file a criminal charge! You see, when you sign our contract, YOU are agreeing to be responsible for OUR card! WHATEVER our car does, you are legally responsible, TO US, for...however, from a legal standpoint of CRIMINAL charges, it would be very difficult to prove that YOU were driving at the time of the criminal violation. We know our car was speeding, we know you signed a paper agreeing to ensure that you would take care of the car. Thus, you owe us money. We cannot, however, go to law enforcement and say, "this person was speeding" because we have no evidence of WHO was driving the car and you can't file criminal charges against a car, only a driver.
As a practical matter, the cops would laugh at us if we tried.
Hope this clarifies some things.
Why are they using GPS to measure speed? Doesn't the car have a speedometer they could hook up to? Use the speedometer to check the speed, and the GPS to make note of where the car is when it is speeding. I don't know how they did it, but I can't imagine using the GPS unit to monitor speed when there is a nice, handy, mostly accurate speedometer already in the car to monitor the speed.
Edward Burr
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
Depends on how your state does tollroads. In Illinois, for example, they just have booths every 5 or 10 miles where you throw your money in the basket/give it to the guy in the booth. Since you don't get any kind of receipt unless you ask for it, they can't ticket you. If they tried to use EZ-Pass to ticket speeders there'd probably be a million EZ-Pass boxes returned the next day.
--
There is no sin except stupidity -- Oscar Wilde
They don't need to get rid of those Firestone tires after all, they can just give them a speed rating of 0 MPH and set the car's speed limiter accordingly. ;)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
No it's not. There is a ticket called "speed too fast for conditions" in many jurisdictions, also "not using due care" and possibly the above could be considered even reckless driving.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
That's pretty funny. They did/tried that in DC. The only problem with it was it was fairly visible and in the rougher parts of DC, the drug dealers on the corner started shooting them out so they wouldn't be on film.
SealBeater
-- Its survival of the fittest...and we got the fucking guns!!!
I don't think I know of anyone that doesn't exceed the speed limit at one point or another. If everyone that rents from these guys is going to start seeing fines for going 5mph over the limit they aren't going to be around to long.
----------
do { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); } while (alive)
----------
while (alive) { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); }
Bool
What if you rent a car in a stat with a 55mph limit then drive it to a state with no speed limit. You aren't breaking the law. Will you still incure a fine? This could even allow car rental businesses to set personal limits. You sign something stating that you won't exceed 45mph.
----------
do { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); } while (alive)
----------
while (alive) { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); }
Bool
Why would you sign something unless you agreed to it?
I have a friend that always says my car isn't "loaded" because it doesn't have a navigation system. I've always told him that even if a navigation system were an option for the car, that I wouldn't want it. He thought it was ridiculous when I told him that GPS will enable people to be given instant speeding tickets. Well, I guess I've been proven right, even if the speeding tickets aren't coming from the government yet.
I have a website. It's about Macs.
The Transparent Society
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
First it's: "We're just using this to make sure your don't speed"
Then it's: "We need to make sure that you didn't park in the Library parking lot where the 'I Think Police Have Too Much Power' discussion ocurred last night"
I can fire you for stealing even if it doesn't go to court.
Of course... but can you take an amount off my final paycheque in excess of what I stole as punishment for my actions?
I can evict you for making noise in your apartment even if no complaint is filed with the police.
Yes, but can you decide to not give me back my damage deposit because of it?
I can divorce you for murdering my child even if you didn't get convicted.
Yes, but can you yourself personally decide to administer appropriate justice by giving me a lethal injection?
In none of these cases am I "impersonating a police officer" or "handing out citations". I am just exercising my rights of association and contract.
No... but what the company did WAS just such an example of that. They decided to fine their patron for allegedly breaking the law. And note, I say "allegedly"... if you get a speeding ticket, as the article said, you can challenge it in court. With this "fine" from the company, there was no such opportunity to challenge their claim. The opportunity to challenge a speeding citation holds the law enforcement agencies accountable for their actions. If they give somebody a ticket, they had better be able to substantiate in a court of law that the person was speeding! I don't see any of that here.
I don't advocate reckless abandonment of law and order, but I don't think any private corporation has ANY right to fine somebody for "breaking the law" with their equipment when there is nobody holding them accountable for that. The only way that this sort of thing should be allowed is if and only if instead of simply debiting the guy's credit card, they are willing to send the guy a bill for "speeding" (the evidence for which they would document in the bill, and be prepared to submit it to a court, if necessary), and a statement of intent to sue for it and legal costs if they are unwilling to pay. Then everyone is given their say and due process can fairly occur.
Now there is the legitimate issue of paying extra charges for using rented equipment in a manner which violates some sort of TOS agreement that takes place when the equipment is initially rented. To this point, the company must stand to the issue that their equipment for automatically determining infractions is infallible enough that they can be assured they have legitimate claim against an alleged "abuser" of their equipment... and they had better be able to prove it in a court of law! Certainly the company would owe it to the person to inform him or her of the exact extra charges being put on the credit card. This is something else which did not appear to happen in this story.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I had to take a defensive driving course due to getting cited for an accident that wasn'e even my fault. Anyway, the video specifically stated the 3 methods for avoiding collisions in defensive driving are braking, accelerating and steering. Reverse isn't an option because it's not a fast reaction. When can accelerating prevent an accident? When you have to get out of the way of someone who wasn't being a defensive driver and the only way to get out of their way is forward fast.
In that car accident I referred to (where I got cited) I was making a left turn into a shopping center at a median a block past a light. The cars going the opposite way were stopped because the light was red, and they made room to let me cross to get into the shopping center. There is also a shoulder to the road at the shopping center entrance before the light, which some people use to make a quick entrance into the right turn lane at the light.
I knew that sometimes cars do this, so I looked carefully to make sure no cars were coming before I proceded to move across the shoulder into the shopping center. I start moving. I'm half way out and I hear my wife scream. A Dodge Ram pickup comes out of no where at 50 mph onto this shoulder and is heading right for us.
How do I get out of the way? Can't go left. Can't go right. Can't just stop. I have to go straight forward.
I hit the gas and thought I made it, but the Dodge hit the rear right quarter panel. If not for my sudden burst of acceleration, my wife probably would have been seriously injured or killed.
And I get fucking cited. I was the one being careful. The lady driving the Ram is going 50 in the rain and instead of slowing down for the red light she swerves onto the shoulder at 50 mph so she can avoid traffic to get to the turning lane.
-- nolesrule
Just today, I was in my car doing about 55-60, but my GPS -- a Magellan 2000 -- said I was doing 580 mph. It also said that I was 700 miles away from the town I was headed to, which in reality was only about 10 miles away. And this wasn't a temporary thing either...it kept it up, fluctuating around those values for at least a minute and a half until I turned it off.
I would HATE to think what the fine would be for that. And no, I am not making any of this up or bloating the values...it really said that I was doing 580 mph (in an 84 Oldsmobile??!?)
---
DOOR!!
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
>Studies are revealing that town that install those red-light cameras are not shortening the length that the yellow-light stays on.
Same here. That's why I'm careful nowadays to slam my brakes on (occasionally to the point of laying rubber) to ensure I don't go through the yellow light if there's a stop cam on there. If I need to go through one of these intersections I litterally ensure all the movable objects in my care are secured first.
I also speed up to the limit (well... maybe more) when going through these intersections to ensure I don't get a ticket. You should see my left turns at these intersections. My in car holy-shit-handles are getting worn because of this...
I remember reading somewhere that after they put these cameras all over an australian city their higher rear end accident stats more than made up for the lower mid-intersection accidents.
And while getting T-Boned is dangerous, I bet whiplash (a primary effect of being run into from behind) is worse...
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
You missed his point. I don't give a rats ass what you do with your time, just don't ask me to pay for it. Too bad your state didn't go all the way and just plain old ban medicaid. Government has no business providing healthcare, fighting poverty, or anything else. They'll just fsck it up anyway.
Examine the US govts track record (I'm not familiar with any other, but I'll bet the trends are similar):
The Daily Build
"I can't drive..... FIFTY FIVE!"
Between that and "Mas Tequila," driving just ain't what it used to be.
"Ask me about Loom"
A lot of luxory cars have that, actually. If the airbags deploy and there is no driver response, they send out a distress signal via GPS
D
Mad Scientists with too much time on thier hands
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
That argument might be appealing. Except the last time I heard it, it was from a serial killer.
__
Did any of you even bother reading this story? How about those people who moded up these retorts that obviously didn't read the story?
The issue that seems to be overlooked here, is the fact that the company is taking on the role of law enforcement here as well as judge and jury. Since when can a corporation assume the responsibility to enforce the law in the first place? Let alone fining a driver for something nobody witnessed. I am not a constitutional expert by any means but since when can anyone but the government appoint somebody else to uphold and protect the law? This company is in effect taking the legal system out and stepping into its place. The implications of this scare the shit out of me and should you as well.
Also, this technology is still relatively new. For example, the trucking industry has used satellite tracking (ala GPS) for a few years now and while the companies that control such systems (Qualcomm as well as the trucking company) can usually get a pretty decent idea if their drivers are exceeding the speed limit, the technology is in no way proven itself to be reliable enough on which to base a conviction for breaking such laws. Even the Department of Transportation will not issue speeding tickets from satellite tracking information due to the inherent unreliability. I worked in the trucking industry for many years and used such satellite systems to track our drivers. It was not at all uncommon to see a vehicle remain stationary as per the tracking system when in fact the vehicle was actually rolling. Guess what it looks like when the satellite catches up though? You got it. All of a sudden the vehicle has covered a distance in the matter of seconds, thus giving the appearance the vehicle was breaking the speed limit. These blackouts are all to frequent to use this method even as a speculative indicator, let alone a sturdy and precise method to convict somebody beyond a reasonable doubt.
What if other companies start trying to enforce the law using automated methods such as this? What if Microsoft started levying huge fines because they were reasonably confident you were using their software in violation of their license agreement. Should we just let companies become our police instead? Hell, may as well. They seem to be getting more and more say as to what becomes law nowadays compared to the citizens of this country. For our sake, let's hope this story has a happy ending.
--
So, you don't speed?
Then get out of the damn fast lane geezer.
---
Hammer of Truth
I'm sure, while this may not be illegal per se, you WOULD go to jail.
---
Hammer of Truth
No, not another law... ;)
Anyway, stupid behavior on motorcycles is a self-limiting phenomenon. Not that I'd know anything about it...
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Better idea that doesn't invade privacy... Put a GPS on every telephone pole. Send an ambulance if the telephone pole accelerates from 0 mph to 50 mph within a second.
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
>> no notification before the money is withdrawn from your account
This is the guy's fault for using a Debit card. Never, ever use a Debit card. If your bank sends you one, send it back and demand a ATM (with PIN).
With the exception of folks with bad credit, there is *ZERO* benefit to the consumer for a credit card. Lots of risk, no benefit.
Get a card with a 20+ day grace and set up direct draft to pay the amount in full every month. All the benefits none of the risk.
If you're credit is that bad... well... better be *VERY* carefull, and get a CREDIT card ASAP.
Oh yea.... READ THE CONTRACTS BEFORE YOU SIGN!
--- If it's worth doing, it's worth doing in Perl!
What ticks me off is law enforcement is investing in such drastic measures to get common citizens doing petty things like speeding. Just so they can stick you with some ridiculous fine. I'd like to see this much zeal when they're chasing burgulars. Two of my friends recently had their cars stolen. The thieves ran the cars out of gas both times and left lots of incriminating evidence (mail) in the cars. The cops haven't bothered to do a thing. They don't even search the cars. In fact, had the cars not been abandonded, they probably never would have been found. Cops spend 95% of their time serving as a revenue source for city hall.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
It needs to be stated that this case belongs in the larger category of excesses by private police.
Many of the U.S. public seems to feel that their safety and well-being requires handing over the public police service to private corporations that operate like the businesses they are. And the increasing false reliance on technology instead of people operating under the law.
Witness the privatization of everything from the sidewalk cop (replaced by a private security guard) to security cameras to prisons and schools.
Does all this privatization really increase safety and this use of technology really secure our rights? Probably not--it is increasing apace even without any scientific studies of its effects--it has a political agenda of its own--to make money for the businesses that are free from the controls that public forces are.
Does this AirQ device actually use the GPS signal to record the ground speed, or is it linked to the speedometer? Because I have a GPS with a 'maximum speed recorded' feature, and I sometimes find it's quite inaccurate. This is probably due to the tendency to the location to 'snap' instantenously when satellite visibility changes, making it look like I travelled half a block in 5 seconds.
If this sort of thing becomes widespread, I hope that whoever makes the in-car GPS units (Garmin?) has some good legal defense against being sued for innaccurately reporting speed.
-- Bob
It's the local government's responsibility to deal with speeding. It's a crime and the car rental company doesn't have any jurisdiction in handing out citations. I think he probably has a case because it seems that the rental company is impersonating a police officer. On a related topic, in the Atlanta area recently I've seen DOT cars pulling over motorists for speeding. Doesn't the DOT have other things to worry about and isn't this, again, under local jurisdiction?
---
1. When I have to pass a truck... a few years ago I sped up to pass a salt truck on the highway. As I was passing the load became unstable and the truck flipped. Moral of the story: Don't take your time passing a truck on the highway.
you will not be safer by accelerating around someone who is driving badly.
I dont know about eveyone else, but I would rather be in front of someone who is driving badly then behind, that way if they get into a wreck I am in no danger.
Just my 2 cents...
"Excuse me miss, but you better slow down or we will have to deactive your car" But officer if I stop, I'll blow up. "B*ll Sh*t, pull over now!" Um sorry now "Damn B*tch" *pulls out electric pulse gun* -=erree crashh bang=- *explosive boom* "damn guess she was right.... woops"
Forcing customers to watch the speedometer rather than the road is always an ideal situation. Don't need to speed if cars crash into you.
I don't know if his "debit card" would do it (and since when does a rental agency accept a debit card??), but any credit card I've had would do a chargeback on any charge not explicitly authorized. Then ACME would have to sue him... and good luck to them, in front of a small claims court :)
Solution to keeping the GPS system from knowing:
Stop it from acquiring position. Encase the antenna in something that will keep it from acquiring. Or pull the antenna plug from the receiver.
There's a number of problems:
Plus, there's the obvious issue that, in order to effectively vote with their money, consumers need to be informed. This story is helping to serve that purpose.
I do agree that it's Acme's car and they may stipulate how you use it. But that doesn't mean I'm particularly happy with the manner that they went about it. Furthermore, it's possible for them to be engaging in legal business practices that're still considered deceptive in nature.
It is liable if he speeds and injures someone. It is only a matter of time before some plantiff's attorney comes up with the "brilliant" idea that Acme should have prevented the speeding in the Acme rental car that injured their client, and is therefore liable. Further in response: 1. "inadequate disclosure" - no, read the contracts you enter. 2. "no appeals process" - it was not a legal proceeding and therefore none is required. It is a business transaction--jsut the same as if you damagged the car and they charged you. The recourse is a civil suit. Period. 3. "GPS "jumping" as you switch satelites" - Again civil suit, prove it and you get your money back. Otherwise, if you read teh contract you could decline the GPS vehicle. Free country--free choice. No likey, no renty. 4. "no notification before the money is withdrawn from your account" - don't recall any mention that the contract he signed required notice. Does the bank give you notice every time they exact fees BEFORE they do? Does any business if you entered an agreement to let them charge you? No. 5. "how much should be withdrawn is solely up to the judgement of the rental agency" - how much every busienss charges for Windows is wholly up to the business unless it is regulated in that area. You against free markets now?
See, I own a '95 Ford Mustang, 6cyl, 3.8liter engine, and it's governed at 110mph. It has a little more energy to make it faster, but the stock tires that came on the car (long gone, actually) were likely not capable of doing that for long, safely. A friend of mine owns a Camaro Z28. His car (if governed at all) has managed to do 140-150+, but his car also has Z rated tires (rated to like 165-175mph or so). Mine has S rated tires, if I recall correctly.
Keep in mind, automanufacturers Cannot put governers on the cars for the Government because laws vary, from state to state and over time. It would cost them too much in both popular opinion and effort to try to enforce speed limits by crippling your car mechanically/electronically. The only thing they care about in terms of governing your car's speed is so that you are alive to buy another car from them, and that you are not able to sue them because they put something out capable of doing something unsafe. (Read: The common joe moron would sue, like joe smoker sues the tobacco companies).
I guess I'm showing my age when I say what I'm about to say.
Remember when the United States Congress lowered the speed limits "to save gas"? When the standard top speed for the Interstates was lowered from 70 mph to 55 mph? And how long (and how many tickets and revenue) it took for the people to make their displeasure known and to get the speed limits raised to something reasonable?
Oh, the rationale for doing it was great. The fuel consumption difference between a "standard" car running at 70 mph and running at 55 mph was significant, and the traffic safety "experts" also predicted that traffic deaths would go down when the speed limit went down.
The "standard" car has for the most part been consigned to the junkyard or the crusher, and the cars on the road have better gas milage and design so that the difference isn't all that great. Further, when the speed limit was raised from 55 to 65, the actual results confounded the "experts" by not going up, and in some places traffic deaths and injuries went down.
What about the problem with "rubbing," where trucks and cars are going at different speeds? Well, in Nevada and California I don't see any difference in speed between autos and trucks, and I don't see the NHP and CHP pulling speeding trucks over, either. I guess the *HP prefer lower traffic deaths to slavish adherence to bad traffic laws.
I know passing an out of commission SUV is fun and all, but which is worse? An aggro SUV or one stalled via remote in the center lane of a freeway during rush hour?
-hc- I always get the shakes before a drop...
If the auto industry were receptive to adding car features at the government's whim, and the government were interested in enforcing speed limit laws with a hammer of justice, then the cars we buy would already be mechanically stunted to prevent them from going any faster than 65 mph.
Yet, I can get above 90 mph in my cheapo economy car.
I have a feeling that this rental car company will not keep the speeding policy long. Why? you might ask. Simple, a FAIR amount of people SPEED. People WANT to get home, or to work, or wherever as fast as they can. Not stay in trafic all day. As soon as people start getting fined for speeding from a car rental company they will stop using it(or sue them like this guy did) and go to a rental place that doesn't have this policy. ACME will start loosing customers and money so they will either have to give up the policy or keep losing money.
Speed limits are not laws, but are regulations. When you speed, you are not breaking a law or commiting a crime, you are committing a violation. Crimes have names like misdemeanor or felony.
Last time I rented a car in Austria I enquired at the agent what the speed limit was on motorways.
....
The agent looked at my passport and said that there wasnt any speed limit for me because Austrian police wouldnt send tickets after me to my country.
And they always tell you that Europe is bad on services
well, all this stuff on speeding and safety got me thinking of a good way to root out bad drivers. and, the moderation system here on /. cames to mind. imagine, at any time, one in 50 cars has the right to judge the safety of cars in it's vacitity. think someone's a bit wreckless ? well if it's your turn, turn the pointer to point to the offending car and press the red button. Like them ? press the green one. .... much like the moderation system here. well, are semi-naked babes gonna see more green light ? only time will tell ... but it's something worth exploring. cops can tell when a car's got too many reds ... pull it over and chat with the driver. nice thing is, the moderators can be anyone, so one needs to be weary as long as there are other cars on the road. a more advanced version will allow even pedestrians to award points to cars.
Yeah, but it won't increase their profitability, because high value business travelers speed and will take their business elsewhere. Does speeding cause their insurance losses? Doubt it - I suspect it's mostly low-speed collisions and thefts. Just like the majority of insurance losses among people who own cars.
sulli
RTFJ.
Rental agencies may be bastards (consider the CDW for example) but they're not that stupid!
sulli
RTFJ.
The Pennsylvania State speed limit is still 55 Mph. Are we cool or what ?
I alternate between posting +5 and -1 Comments. Karma: +53 -47 = 6
We can do that today, only it's called a "trigger."
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
not that surprized actually...
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
People could get around it the same way they get around emissions laws (in PA at least). Apparently those huge mufflers and pipes that people like to add to their Hondas won't pass inspection, so people just make sure they take it off for inspection. You could do that with GPS, just reconnect it for your inspection.
The whole speeding and safety thing is sort of a twisted argument, after all, even driving at 55 as compared to 65 is going to kill some people in accidents. So then you have to ask what your acceptable "death rate" is, which seems sort of cold. And what about when the speed limit goes up from 55 to 65 (as happened over the past decade), was it "killing people" before to drive 65 but now its ok? Or you can recognize that just b/c its a law doesn't mean it is correct and maybe the speed limits should reflect how most drivers feel comfortable driving on a stretch of road.
Some backwards states (PA comes to mind, and I live there) have been pretty slow about putting the magnetic sensors on, so there are thousands of lights still on timers. I never go through them at night, I am too paranoid about cops, but it is very frustrating, especially since DE next door has replaced nearly all of their timer lights.
I live in Delaware County. Its about as backwards as Philly :) The roads suck in many respects here, not just for the sensors.
US Small claims courts handle up to around $5000 and do not allow attorneys to represent the parties.
Doesn't this agreement violate state laws about police powers? If you don't get a speeding ticket, regardless of GPS reading, how can you prove he was speeding? (if a tree falls in a forest...) And lastly, I know enough about GPS that there are occasional errors that could send your readings flying at an impossible rate. I wonder how much in excess of 90mph he was going? 3372mph?
----------------------
Just wait until EZ-Pass sensors are placed over many roads; I heard this might happen in order to monitor traffic congestion. Presently, they use radar (I believe) for this purpose.
My point is that although one couldn't tell your exact speed from looking, one could tell that you were speeding. The radar gun is just telling law enforcement exactly how much you were speeding.
karma is for the weak >)
I don't see how this has anything in common with using an infrared image to determine what's going on inside a house. It would be more likened to standing outside with a directional microphone and pointing it at your window, imho.
And anyway, it hasn't ever been stopped from getting entered in a court of law, so it doesn't look as though the judicial system agrees with your rather broad interpertation for "search".
karma is for the weak >)
I seem to remember all gps systems shut off when they reach a certain speed because they think they are being used as missile guidance. So if you drive fast enough you wont have a problem!
I've never quite understood how using radar guns are different than searching my body. I sincerely doubt it's possible for a human to detect with no aids whether I'm traveling faster than a posted speed limit alone or with a flow of traffic that is also traveling faster than the posted limit. The officer cannot determine whether I am breaking the law until they zap me with the radar gun (which is an abstraction of a "search"). It's the same way they can't tell whether one is carrying narcotics, one must be "searched" to discover the presence/absence of narcotics. It seems to me very similar to the issue of the (illegal) heat-guns used to discover illegal activities.
So, OK, CompUSA. Here is your $12.50. You win!
Now i'll never spend another goddamn dime here again.
Anyone here going to Acme auto rental again?
In the amount of time it would take you to rent a car from Acme, read all the small print, sign the forms, take the shuttle to the lot to pick up your car, drape tinfoil over the GPS antenna, etc. etc., the baby would arrive in the parking lot. Better take a cab instead.
If you can't afford a car, what makes you think you can afford a baby?
my friend and I were actually discussing something like this...if GPS becomes accurate enough, will the government begin to make auto manufacturers integrate these in to every vehicle, making it so they can just mail you a ticket any time you exceed the speed limit?
Just a thought
How Jaded Are You?
http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/archive/ images/dilbert2004061210620.gif for those worried about goatman.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Try driving at the speed limit in highway traffic sometime. Really. Even in the slow lane. Go 55 while everyone around you is going 70, 75, 80. That 55 driver is FAR more dangerous to the situation than the 80 driver is. The key is NOT speed, it control and sense.
There is NOTHING more inherently dangerous to driving along at 80+ MPH just as long as you're not weaving in and out of traffic and you can keep a safe distance from the car in front of you.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
I'd be interested to hear how this might violate his due process rights under his state's and the federal consitution. Also, how does the legality of red-light camera's carry over to the legality of GPS based "speed monitors"?
Also, does ACME have the right to impose different fines for a criminal violation (state speeding fines vs. ACME's new speeding fines)? Does this violate his due-process rights?
Very interesting.
-- bearclaw
I could not agree more on the red light issue. There is no promise, ever, in running a red light. My friends laugh at me when I stop at lights that have been yellow for a while. I continue to do it.
Everytime you speed, you run the risk of killing someone.
To the extent that every time you get in a car, you run the risk of killing someone, this is true. But increasing speed does not necessarily increase the risk of accident. The death rates on the unlimited stretches of the Autobahnen in Germany have almost identical death rates to American highways. Death rates on surface roads are generally higher than on highways. When the federal speed limit was dropped, the 41 states that raised their limits saw an aggregate decrease in deaths; the nine that didn't saw an aggregate increase. This is certainly not black and white; there are statistics to back both sides, but the trite "speed kills" argument statistically doesn't wash. There's more to it than that.
Speed doesn't kill, bad driving does. And don't tell me that because you parallel parked on the test, you know how to drive.
-db
What I don't like about all these authoritarian controls can be quickly summed up:
Let me use the issue of speeding to illustrate this issue. There is in the United States a powerful lobby for making people drive slowly on the highway. They claim that speeding is the cause of large numbers of accidents, many of them fatal. They supply statistics to support their position. Critics of this idea are not nearly as well organized. But, while criticism is disorganized, it appears to be well founded.
What about the statistics that support the claims of the antispeeding lobby? These statistics are, in too many ways, a sophisticated version of the guilt by association tactic used so often in the past. They compare two groups, A and B, without noting that group B is really composed of two readily identifiable subgroups A' and C. For example, a small subgroup of drivers who are high in extreme antisocial behavior are also responsible for a quite disproportionate number of serious accidents. Lump them in with people whose only "crime" is exceeding the speed limit and you have the statistical support for crackdowns on speeding.
This focus on individual drivers diverts attention from dangerously overcrowded highways. Whatever you think of the causes, United States' highways (at least in many places) are quite overcrowded today.
The application of this exercise to drugs, pornography, what ever ticks you off is left to the reader.
"Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy." -- B. Franklin
I think $150 dollar fine for speeding is clear enough.
(as explicitly enumerated in the article) no appeals process
its not a court of law, he has no right to appeal within the company, he can merely challenge the charges in court, which is what he is doing.
(as mentioned in other comments) problems with GPS "jumping" as you switch satelites
This is something he can challenge in court, since it is currently unknown by anyone here whether or not the system detects that the car violated the laws of physics.
"no notification before the money is withdrawn from your account" That is unclear, he never states whether it was on the receipt or not, again something to be challenged in court.
"how much should be withdrawn is solely up to the judgement of the rental agency"
which he was prenotifed of the fees, and he certainly knew he was speeding.
If you don't like the terms, don't sign the contract. End of story.
Burn Hollywood Burn
1. You know damn that is not why people are complaining and looking for work arounds.
2. Where I am from, all the roads have censors that detect when a car is stoped at a light at night time and changes it to green with a few seconds.
Burn Hollywood Burn
I don't see any "Big Brother" thing here, if everyone voted with your wallet, offensive companies would go out of business.
Burn Hollywood Burn
He signed the contract before he drove the car. He gave his consent.
Burn Hollywood Burn
The govt current does NOT have the right to "monitor your location simply because they own the means of transportation".
But to answer a modified version of you question, "should individuals or companies have the right to monitor what you do with their car, including but not limited to 1. location 2. speed 3. what was in it 4. what you did in the car..?" I would answer yes. You have no expectation of privacy once you enter my property, especially if I notify you how I expect you to treat my car. End of story.
If you don't like those terms, use a different car. Welcome to a free country where you can make choices.
Burn Hollywood Burn
"More important is the issue of due process," says Keyes. "There's no system for challenging this fine. At least when you get a ticket, the court system allows you to contest it." She claims the speeding charges are constitutionally invalid and go against public policy
Riiiight.....I got news for this fellow, in the US, individuals are constitutional protectioned is exactly zero ways from companies. Zero. This is a clear cut case of contract law, nothing more nothing less.
The only civil rights laws I know of that deal with companies have to do with equal treatment and access based on Race, Sex and Disabilities. Last time I checked, lack of technological prowness was not considered a and technogical access is not a basic human right.
The fees were in the contract, he signed it. The only arguement is whether the contract was valid or invalid. This has nothing to do with rights.
Burn Hollywood Burn
Stop breaking them! Everytime you run a redlight, you run the risk of killing someone. Everytime you speed, you run the risk of killing someone. I personally have been hit by a car that ran a stop sign while riding my bicycle. I lost a friend who ran a stop sign and got side swiped.
You would think you had a right to break traffic laws or something by the way you people bitch.
Burn Hollywood Burn
It seems like it would be a lot easier/ more accurate to track your speed with an onboard computer.
My other sig is extremely clever...
Certainly it would be possible to put a computer on the car which recorded each time the car went over a certain speed. This would be far more accurate than relying on GPS. Anyway, the company should also have to demonstrate that the posted speed was exceeded. (Yeah I was going 85, that was the speed limit!) Of course this raises the question, since you are responsible for ALL damage that your rental car sustains, why would they care how fast you were going(unless you were red-lining it(which you could do at 40 mph)) Sounds like someone is trying to suck all of the fun out of driving!
My other sig is extremely clever...
Only three of your points are valid:
(as explicitly enumerated in the article) no appeals process
This is a private company. You don't like the appeals process? Tough luck. You signed the contract. This is not the government, from which you have a right to expect an appeals process. It might not be good customer service, but it's completely legit.
no notification before the money is withdrawn from your account
We can't assume that from the story. Some other part of the contract might have stipulated an automatic charge to your credit card.
how much should be withdrawn is solely up to the judgement of the rental agency
See the first point above. You signed the contract.
You're on sounder ground with insufficient disclosure (the wording provided in the story doesn't explicitly link speeding to monitoring by the GPS device) and "jumping" position as you switch satelites (something that the morons of this company should have considered before instituting the policy.
But overall, you have to live by the rules of a contract. Didn't read it carefully? That's your problem -- you should have rented elsewhere.
In SCCA road rally, where you try to drive a specified average speed over the course, GPS has been very accurate. I would say to within a couple MPH over a 3 mile leg at 35 MPH.
I'm not sure how accurate this will be for peak speeds or instanteneous speeds though. The onboard computers in most cars would likely be much better sources of finding exactly how fast a car has been driven over the past week.
And as for the "humanitarian reasons" for the GPS monitoring, I'll assume next that they will only rent out economy cars and not the gas guzzling sport utes or luxury cars because they have adverse effects on the environment. Perhaps they will only rent electric cars.
Jerks
Murphy's Law of Copiers
I love the smell of Karma in the morning
They were not using GPS to caculate the speed!!
nobody said that there was anything wrong with 'the law' (which one are you talking about anyway?) The issue is if GPS is accurate enough to prove speed at a given point in time and whether or not this policy, if enforceable, violates laws governing personal privacy or not.
I like toast!
Andy Green would probably have something to say about me smashing his record though.
No, actually just because something is in the terms doesn't mean that it can be legally enforced. SOL because you put your name on the line isn't really a legal defense ACME can use. For example, just because the contract reads that you have to give them your first born child doesn't mean that it's an enforceable contract clause even if you sign the contract. People that read contracts and then write opinions that people are "just out of luck" deserve the karma that comes with such a shallow statement. Secondly, they cannot determine violation of law. That is a function of the courts. They may impose limits on your use of the vehicle(not above 55mph) but they can't say "You violated speed limits in these three states, so we're going to fine you, no conviction necessary". The contract clause states that you may not exceed *posted* limits, and is in fact the singular criteria for violation. Therefore locality and speeding laws of the locality are necessary in order to determine whether you were in violation of the contract clause. But the only one who legally can make a determination of whether you were in violation of those laws is the courts. The rental agency could present the evidence, if allowed, in your appearance but the courts must rule as to whether or not a violation has occured. No matter how accurate or foolproof the technology, until I'm convicted in a court of law I've violated no law. If I have not violated any law, therefore I must have been obeying the speed limits. Hence I could not have been speeding. Therefore no matter what your data says, you've no grounds to enforce this clause. This is different than a previous posting where the person said "We already prohibit some types of behavior, like drinking".This restriction of behavior is not tied to any law. Had they said "if found driving intoxicated above legal limits" then they'd be in the same boat. If you were ticketed while speeding in the vehicle and ultimately convicted in court of speeding, then I could see the clause being contractually and legally enforceable. Courts will decide whether you are speeding, and courts will decide whether this clause is legal. A simple change in wording of this contract would resolve the issue. As offensive as it is, I see no issues with "fining" an individual if the offense is legally proven.
I think they have a new theme song.
I can't drive Fifty-FIIIIVE!!!
Pay for the car in cash, but give them a new fresh credit card you just got(then call and cancel your credit card. Tell the credit card company you will NO accept or make any more charges on this card). From there take your car to a closed circuit track and go 80, then stop, go 80 then stop. keep doing this... do this b/c it seems to me they are charging you for stop and go speeding. If you drive 110 from GA To Cali they will charge you $150, but if you drive from Florida to South Carolina and stop 20 times while going 110 21 times, your fine will be outrageous.
Taxes and Lazy People are best friends.
When we go to court to protest the ticket, do you think we could cross examine the GPS device?
Taxes and Lazy People are best friends.
I read a good while back that E-Z Pass users on the NY Thruway are getting tagged with speeding tickets in the mail for beating the "legal" time between their entry and exit points. Which is one reason why I keep my car's ashtray full of change and will never get an E-Z Pass.
~Philly
Slightly off topic, but still a good point. I was the victim of that sort of scam with a ski-do rental operation. They tell you if you exceed 6 knots in the marina, you forfeit your $150 deposit. Of course the whole group attempts to stay at 6 knots, not having an accurate way of measuring. When we came back in, the entire group, including folks that didn't know each other, were fined for exceeding the speed limit. How did they know? We were creating a wake. Why didn't they tell us? Because they wanted an extra $150 over the $50 rental. Those of us who had our deposits on credit card, immediately called our companies to dispute the charge. Those who gave them cash had an uphill battle. In the end they dropped the "fine" because the credit card companies took our side. As a side effect those people who gave them cash got their money back as well.
-Nuke the moon
Sory, couldn't find the link to Globe and Mail article. In a nutshell, they have an unmarked police car patrolling Toronto highways and ticketing for "unsafe driving" cars that go below speed limit+20km/h in the left lane ("left-lane bandits"). This is a strange kind of agreement between police and drivers - nobody gets fined for driving 110-115 in 100km/h zone. They could raise it to 120 and really enforce - this would be honest.
Almost all cars made or for sale in the US have speed limiters which cut out your accellerator when you go faster than 125 mph, anyway, even though you could technically go that fast in certain portions of Montana and not disobey the speed limit.
... do you have enough spare time and energy to challenge it? Or were you really breaking the speed limit and knew it, in which case, do you have any ethical defense?
But since GPS is fairly faulty and jumps a lot, this is likely subject to a court challenge and quite winnable - unless you're going in a straight line from one city to another and stay there for a while.
I used to have a GPS on my Saturn SC2, as part of a pilot project for one of those talking map things, and it would fry out in extreme heat or cold - you had to press the manual reset buttons (which they hid) to get it to work again.
But
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
This is unbelievably short-sighted.
My state government isn't even this stupid. If you travel on the turnpike, you get a ticket, stamped with the current time/date, when you get on the highway. When you get off, they run your ticket through a machine which calculates your toll. It could trivially calculate your average speed and the nice person at the gate could hand you a speeding ticket with your change.
Fortunately, they don't. Because if they did, people would stop using the turnpike, and they'd lose income.
I'm not a fan of rental-car agencies in general, but I'll certainly never use this one.
--Blob
All sweeping generalizations suck.
Arrghh. No. No. No. There is often no reason to have a 55 mph speed limit. Maybe in congested areas back east. But rarely in the west and mid-west. And forcing us to drive slow because "it saves quite a bit of fuel and it's much easier" is big brother at his worst. This is supposed to be a land of freedom. Why should *you* care how fast I drive so long as I'm driving safely? Now I don't mind a car rental place putting limits on how you use their car. That seems fair. But if I own the car and am driving responsibly then I ought to be allow to do what I wish. Don't tell me I should drive a small car. Don't tell me how fuel efficient *I* should be. Don't tell me to use public transportation. If you want to, more power to you.
Good - you rent from Hertz - I'll save the $10 bucks and rent from the other place.
Shouldn't a GPS jammer be relatively trivial to make? I mean the frequencies are all published.
Not the fining without due process, which is creepy enough. Note what else it says in the article:
"An agent can even shut a car off by remote control if it's going too fast or heading into territory it's not supposed to be in."
This sounds a bit dangerous, no? If you're already speeding, and someone decides to turn off your engine? In most cars, this will lock the steering wheel, too, and turn off the power brakes. Looks like I'm not planning on renting a car from Acme any time ever...
Note to self:
Don't forget to take a lead GPS "antenna cover" with me when renting from ACME this summer.
Instead of whining about this, show how smart you are and start doing this yourself. The possibilitys are endless. Fine coworkers and family members alike for each occurrence. $150 is chump change, make it at least one large. The unit only costs $550 here http://www.spysite.com/gps_tracking.html
Too lazy to cut and paste;TravelEyes is a GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) vehicle tracking system used for monitoring the travel activities of private vehicles. The TravelEyes unit uses GPS satellite signals to provide extremely accurate positioning, typically between 10 feet and 50 feet of actual vehicle location. Designed to be concealed within the vehicle (the included small GPS antenna 1.5"x1.5"x.75" must be placed in an unobstructed location to "see" the satellites signal - cannot be blocked by metal or other materials that prohibit radio signals), the miniature-sized TravelEyes is a tiny computer that rides aboard the vehicle telling you the exact whereabouts of the driver, including the address of each destination, names of streets traveled, how long the vehicle remained at each location AND IF THE DRIVER WAS SPEEDING!
Just want to see what it looks like; http://www.spysite.com/images/traveleyes2.jpg
They did not offer any policy renewals earlier this year, so I still have the GPS and device in my dash. Circuit City did the install and wouldn't tell me where in the dash the device was so I could not disable it, so it is still there. I wonder if they are still monitoring me. The progressive agent who sold me the policy did say, when asked, that they would turn the GPS information over if it was requested by the authorities.
This was a trial program in Texas. I think they had a couple thousand policies and are waiting for all the claims to settle before deciding to take it nationwide.
you never know where big brother will pop up next
The one thing that bothers me most is not the tracking itself (as scary as that is), but one particular sentence: "It saves lives by discouraging speeding."
How many more studies have to come out proving that speeding does not cost lives? Just a 10 mph increase in highway speed limit reduces fatalities 5 to 10%. Check out this one study in California. Most driving accidents are caused by lack of full attention to the road (18 to 21 year olds playing with the radio, mid-twenties talking to passenger), and of course drunk driving. If anyone would bother listening to the studies made we wouldn't have such low speed limits and fatality rates would drop.
And as an added bonus there wouldn't be so many cops whose only job is to ticket speeders!
(Can you tell I've gotten a few speeding tickets in my time?)
---
Developers: We can use your help.
And here's more info with links about how raising speed limits doesn't make drivers drive faster, and most speeding deaths are due to drunk driving.
---
Developers: We can use your help.
One concern is that the ticket is then given to the car owner and not the driver. If you lent out your car to a friend or your child, or your car was stolen, you would be liable for any tickets garnered by the driver of your car. It would then be up to you to prove that you didn't commit the crime. The burden of proof should be on the law enforcement officials, not you.
Also, there are some cases when running a red light is unavoidable, and the cameras don't allow for exceptions. Say, for example, traffic is really back up, and you are half way into the intersection when the light turns red. Ideally, you would go ahead so as not to block traffic, but your rear tires might trigger the camera, which would neither know or care why you were running a red light.
My dingo ate your honor student.
So require a transponder in order to use those roads. Works for Singapore - you can't enter the CBD unless your car has a transponder. You can rent one for the day if you've driven in from Malaysia or whatever.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
Has anyone considered simply NOT speeding and actually stopping at red lights?
Seems to me this whole thing would be quite less an issue if everyone just drove safely with the same regard for my life and theirs that I have for my own.
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
If you rent a car, and sign an agreement that says you will obey traffic laws with it, they have every right to do this. The agreement would have to include the clause that they will monitor you, and add an additional charge to your rental contract if you disobey traffic laws, but it is THEIR CAR. If you don't like it, don't rent it. Renting someone elses property, does not give you ownership.
It's easy to write songs, you just sit down and write them?
"For all of you screaming about how it's a simple case of contract law and it's his own fault for signing it, you should keep in mind the following very important fact: Just because something has been stipulated in a contract does not make it legal, or even legally binding."
This is true. For instance, your employer can't slip in a "slavery" clause in the NDA they shove in your face.
In fact, many courts have been throwing out draconian employer non-comptete agreements. Those were contracts.
I think that many courts will frown on ACME's practice as well. If for no other reason than corporate vigilante law enforcement for-profit cuts in on the government's turf.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
Either way, I think it's a great idea, and a leap forward to the day when we can detect aggressive driving on the fly and deactivate the vehicle remotely. Someday we'll be able to just switch off those retarded SUV drivers on the freeway with the push of a button!
Yes, that's exactly what we need. Someone who doesn't know how to drive a car driving a 2 ton SUV who suddenly finds themselves in a position where their SUV stops running in the middle of a crowded highway. That sounds safe to me!
I honestly think that people haven't the slightest clue how to operate a motor vehicle. Especially the slow-pokes doing 55 in a 55 when everybody else is doing 75.
For all of you screaming about how it's a simple case of contract law and it's his own fault for signing it, you should keep in mind the following very important fact: Just because something has been stipulated in a contract does not make it legal, or even legally binding.
They were going to do this here in Marietta but decided against it based on the argument that it would cause drivers to speed up ALOT so they wouldn't get caught in the intersection. It was felt that any accidents that DID happen would be MUCH WORSE.
If you open your mind too wide, people will throw trash in it.
kewl - judge dredd is in france!
speeding - 10 years punk.
:-)
A crash reduces
Your expensive computer
A crash reduces
Your expensive computer
to a simple stone.
Next time you rent a car from these bozos find the GPS device (shouldn't be hard for a slashdot reader) and then pull the supply fuse. (Or put in a blown one if anyone gets suspicious). -ted
Does this bozo's company have a charter to operate a police department, court, and violations bureau? That is exactly what they are operating.
In the EU all trucks must by law have a tachometer fitted that makes a continuous record of the speed of the truck. It is used to monitor the drivers hours and stop them from driving when they are too tired. Given that the accidents caused by heavy goods vehicles can kill ten or twenty people at a time this is a pretty good idea.
Anything that discourages HGVs from tailgating has to be a good idea. It would be even better if SUVs also had to have the same gear fitted, after all if they get the benefit of the light trucks emissions limits they should be taxed like trucks and have the same speed limiters.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
If the govt decided every car had to have a gps receiver + transmitter, I'd be forced to stick the receiver in a faraday cage or whatever necessary to prevent any incoming signals. or put a small transmitter next to the receiver strong enough to mask the real GPD
My server
The first point is that speeding is illegal and you ought not do it. Excessive speeding is dangerous to the speeding driver as well as others who are on the road. It's a bad thing to do in general.
The second point is that this kind of Big Brother-ism on the part of the rental car company can be quickly dealt with be actually posting the name of the company. Let's say it was Avis (I don't know, let's just pretend). If Avis decides to do this, Budget can then advertise that they don't "spy" on their customers. Customers then vote with their feet. Companies who may have previously had rental agreements with Avis would also back out because the extra expenses accrued by business travelers would be intimidating.
In a capitalistic society, voting with your feet effects the greatest change without having to resort to government involvement.
Dancin Santa
I moved back to New Mexico just before the big wave of Californians began moving into New Mexico (which begin in the early 1990s). As bad as New Mexican drivers are, it was easy to spot California drivers because the Californians were much more aggressive, drove faster and changed lanes much more frequently. It was easy to confirm they were Californians because they still had California license plates on their cars.
I moved to Texas in 1993, and to East Texas in 1994. In East Texas, drivers like to slow to about 5 mph a block before their turn and then make a 90 degree turn, even if they are in a 40 zone. The first time a Texas woman rear-ended and totaled my car, it was as I was stuck behind one of these slow-moving turners (the SMTs often don't indicate why they are slowing until they get much closer to their corner; by then, it's too late to change lanes). East Texans also don't like to make right turns on the red light, even though it is legal at most intersections.
Now, I'm in the Dallas area. The drivers are too aggressive, and not terribly bright. Red light runners are the leading cause of traffic death in the area. I see a traffic accident on Loop 635 at the same spot at least once a month.
I recently took a trip up through Chicago, into Indiana and then into Michigan. I was only there for a week, so I didn't get much of a feel for the driving. Generally, I didn't have trouble, though I did photograph a woman in a van attempting to push a semi-trailer. For the most part, the traffic violations I witnessed were people driving over the speed limit.
when I was living in East Texas, I realized that I needed to begin documenting the crazy driving I saw. I have to film it! That is one of the projects on my to-do list; set up a rig on my vehicle so that I can videotape and photograph all the nit-witted things I see every day.
I saw a car on Loop 635, as we were all doing about 70 mph, that suddenly began fishtailing wildly. Smoke was pouring from the tires. Apparently, the driver hadn't noticed until the last minute that there were road construction pylons in his lane. He eventually went up the side of the offramp hill and onto a service street.
I don't have to go far to see crazy things, either. Right in front of my apartment complex, in a 35 zone, I watched a large panel truck attempt a U-turn. He could not complete the turn in a single move. The truck backed up--and would have put its back end through a car's windshield if the car hadn't swerved into the next lane at the last second.
Meanwhile, some people get upset that handguns are legal...
Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
In New Jersey, there a was an uproar when someone realized that average speeds could be calculated. The EZ-Pass people quickly promised that they would never turn over the record to police for this purpose.
And if they ever try to do it and successfully prosecute someone, just watch how many thousands of EZ-Pass transponders are returned the next day!
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
The technology to record speed over time existed back in the 1950's! You know, perhaps a maximum speed indication, resettable before each rental. Or, more expensively, a strip recorder. Sure, it would have been clunky and analog and would not have included location info, but it sure as hell would have been good enough to catch 90 mph!
Ok, Sandy, now grab the gearshift and pull up on the knob...
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
These are the same guys, though, who give you the "option" of paying for a whole tank of gas ahead of time, whether you use it or not, or paying $3.50 or more per gallon if you bring it back half-full.
These are the same guys (well, different company anyway, I won't mention names, but it's for people on a tight budget) that will tell you you have a fixed rate to rent the car for five days, with a fixed rate for each day over that, then when you bring it back after six days, they try to charge you an extra $200.00 beyond all that because going beyond the 5-day special extended-weekend rate voids that rate and you retroactively go on the Pay Thru The Nose Rate, so you tell them that they can either charge what they said they would or you will be happy to see them in court over it and they say I'm sorry sir there's nothing I can do because the computer won't let me charge any other rate and you say see ya and they say wait let me see, well, I can give you an AAA discount, and, miracle of miracles, it actually turns up a little bit less than the 5-day weekend special rate plus one day by about five or ten dollars and you leave paying less but are still pissed off because it's been over an hour standing around while they fussed at stuff.
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
The rental car companies would be smart to deploy a system which uses GPS tracking to determine the speed limit and the car's own speedometer to read the speed.
Determining the speed limit of the location of the car would be within the capacity of the GPS, but as you said, determining speed would not.
I really doubt that this will ever be put into effect because the costs of implementing such a system in a market where prices are so competetive would be unacceptable.
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
But not all the suburbs of PA use Road Sensors. As a matter of fact, there are many suburbs in PA that do NOT use sensors, especially in the southeastern portion of the state. As far as ACME is concerned, the State Police in NJ want to implement a similar program with the EZPass automatic toll payment system.
"Oh I see. You resort to brute force when you can't get something by arguing for it..." - Xellos
I prefer the idea of the James Bond missle option to a push button. Much more dramatic.
I also live in PA. The only areas that really have timers for their lights are the big cities like Philadelphia and the like, which I stay as far away from as possible. I was smart enough to move out to the suburbs as quickly as I could, and I have to say, after growing up in Philadelphia, that Sensors in the road are definitely something I don't want to have to do without. My drive to work in the morning is great. Pretty much green all the way. The sensors detect you far enough down the road that 20mph is about as slow as you get when approaching a red light before it notices and goes green. I don't know where the previous poster from PA was referring to, but I've found that this is the general case. Suburbs = Road Sensors for Lights, Cities = Timing Systems for Lights. Simple solution, stay away from major metropolitan areas, it isn't like there's anything worth one's time in a city. As for the whole GPS thing, they (the companies doing the tracking) could just guesstimate one's speed based on the time required to go from one place on the map to another. If you've driven from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh in under 4 hours, they can easily know that you were averaging over 80mph. They don't have to know your position all the time. Reality of it is that they'll never be able to catch everyone all the time..
/* eparkin - Software Architect, Perl/Python Coder, Ex-SCCA Rallycar Driver, FreeBSD & Mac OS X User */
GPS signals are weak and pretty line-of-sight, so hiding the antenna is nearly impossible. What happens if you cover the antenna with some alumunum foil? It can't rely on GPS all the time since the signal is often blocked by buildings, tunnels, etc. Maybe AirIQ will shut down the car if it doesn't get periodic GPS information.
Of course, you can always use a GPS simulator to fool the car's receiver, but that would only be cost effective if you speed a lot.
everytime you installed non-approved software.
Customer Service Rep: "That $160 charge is for your unauthorized installation of Mandrake on your new system. That system is only licensed for Windows, RedHat, and FreeBSD. If you would like to extend your hardware license to include additional OSs, I can transfer you to our sales department."
-----
Bow before my sig, for it is good.
This poster is a professional. Please don't try this at home, severe injury may result, poster not liable for your failure to heed this warning.
--
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
The hokey explanations on the part of the ACME rep about the "need" to use GPS to track speed (not just location, which is all they require for their vehicle retrieval needs) indicate that ACME may have written that contract in less than good faith. If so, they're just begging for a judicial spanking.
(And as #18 says, a bit of aluminum foil over the GPS antenna and the problem goes away... at least in this incarnation of the system.)
--
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
and 2.). . .$150 is not way over normal. Where are you from? I got pulled over in Florida going about 90 and it was $166.
I think I'll stop here.
This just means that someone will write a script that will randomly type in license plate addresses at high speed. Enough of this, and cars will randomly stop on the freeway, causing chaos and mayhem.
Here in the Reich, if the driver of the car can not be identified using their photo they will _try_ to bill the owner of the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle then has the option of naming the person who was using the vehicle at the time. If it goes to court and you play it smart it will get thrown out most of the time but the court might require you to keep a "Fahrtenbuch" log of the usage of your car from the on. Personally, even though I don't get busted very often on the Autobahn even though they have a ridiculous 60 Mph speed limit on the stretch I go to work on every day. (60 Mph might sound reasonable to you, but hey, this is not just any old interstate in the US but the AUTOBAHN. If anything kills on the Autobahn then it's being too slow or dumbass idiots who without flashing pull out into left lane right in front of you. I see it definitely your way: A speeding ticket is nothing more but an extended road usage tax which I will cheerfully pay. Same goes for parking violation or what have you.. Send me the bill. As long as I'm not 41 Km/h over posted limit I can afford to speed (being more than 41 Km/h or runing a red light gets you 1 month of license suspension).
...saw it coming two years ago with so-called "OBD-IV"
It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
When I was a team leader in the Army I could tell exactly how fast my driver was driving by looking at the GPS. Worked magnificantly even without having the "fill" to up accuracy. Never the less I don't agree with the use of this technology for "Big Brother" purposes.
That such a device, if accurate, would be an excellent deterrent to speeding, and perhaps goverors which would otherwise prevent exceeding the limit. However, the problem then becomes when the situation arises such that speeding is nessecary. What if you need to pass someone? Someone begins to threaten you on the road? Anything. I've always thought an "Override" button would be just the thing. You'd have to explain to the proper authorities why it was you needed to speed, and thus, by examining previous records, they would grant or deny the appeal.
the liberator who destroyed my property has realigned my perception
the liberator who destroyed my property has realigned my perception
www.quantumheresy.com
In Europe, we know US cars just sound loud with no performance. That's why we don't buy 'em.
Actually, no matter how much of a traffic delay it causes you (up to a reasonable limit, of course), it's worth it when you finally get to slowly roll by the smoking hulk. In particular if there's still some glass left in it for you to bust out.
This article was obviously ghost written by a slashdot reader:
"The van was equipped with a Global Positioning System, or GPS, which transmits data via satellite."
Something that blatantly wrong could never come from a real reporter (could it?)
The question does arise, however, as to how it really works. The GPS signal IS received from a satellite, however a transmitter that could send back to a satellite from a moving car would require a directional dish antenna and... ya, stupid.
So how ARE they getting the data back? The easiest way would be to record it in flash and dump it after the car is returned. Another way would be to use burst-mode packets like 2-way pagers & LoJack.
Either way, I think it's a great idea, and a leap forward to the day when we can detect aggressive driving on the fly and deactivate the vehicle remotely. Someday we'll be able to just switch off those retarded SUV drivers on the freeway with the push of a button!
/*snip*/
speeding is bad, don't do speeding, if you go fast you're bad...
*/
bs. i'm sooo happy I live in italy where the speed limit is subjective, the road police inexistent, and nobody will ever sue you because they'd have to spend 6x more money just to buy the judje and jury to get them to fine you. the only person I know who got fined for speeding got caught at 5:30 in the morning in the middle of august.
mod me down - like I care
I am not as think as you drunk I am.
I think it was Tacitus who once said something to the affect of, "The empire was the most corrupt when the laws were most prolifigate." He was talking about the Roman Empire, circa 50ad, if you didn't know who he is.
The trouble is in this situation is what happens when corporations start doing some of the things that the government has traditionally done, ie. like speeding tickets? Do you regulate it such that the government has the sole power to enforce speeding? Essentially what the corporation has done is that it has become a government unto itself, with bureaucracies, evil dictators, etc... Generally with no constitution, charter, etc. And what happens when the government exists solely to make a profit? Ouch, it's illegal to pee now, and you gotta pay a fine every time you do it! Good thing there's competition...
Aaaah, sweet capitalism.
...a model of AirIQ that can detect when your daughter is having sex in the back seat!
Instant peace-of-mind!
I thought only the police could nab you for something like that...and $150 is way over normal! If they reported you to the cops automagically, I would be behind this. But as it is, it's worse than Big Brotherism. It's a corporation taking over a function of the state.
43rd Law of Computing:
43rd Law of Computing:
Sorry, my fault. What I meant was avoiding accidents. Nor am I talking about 107MPH. If someone suddenly loses control and starts cutting across lanes, you really *want* to be able to break the speed limit for the few seconds necessary to get yourself out of the way. My butt has been saved by a maneuver of this kind before now, and doubtless it will happen again. I acknowledge your point that most accidents are caused by people driving too fast, but a limit like this will endanger the safety of the rule-abiding majority for the sake of the dangerous minority.
43rd Law of Computing:
I think it's fairly obvious where this is going:
.NET technology will be released to developers. "We're a little behind with .NET and web services, but we're sure that developers want the highest possible level of performance."
.NET Framework Beta 26! (Once it's released.)
- October, 2003: Bill Gates announces that "Microsoft Product Activation" has been a resounding success -- so much of a success, in fact, that he is pleased to announce "Microsoft Geo-Awareness" as the next logical step in Product Activation technologies.
"Microsoft users embraced Product Activation," Gates told the 5,000 developers at Chicago's Tech-Ed conference. "And now we offer users the next phase of our technology: Geo-Awareness. Thanks to advances in microtechnology, tiny GPS devices are embedded in every new DVD of Microsoft XP 2004. This technology will allow us to alert users to lost DVDs and tell them, specifically, where their lost disc can be found."
Gates added the new technology will also ensure that XP 2004 is installed only on the machines for which is was registered for. "You tell us your street location, we locate your house on our terraserver database, retrieve the GPS coordinates, and are able to activate your XP 2004 DVD so that it will install on exactly the machine you intended it to be installed on. In fact," Gates added, "we allow you to move within a 100 foot radius. If, say, you decide to add a new bedroom onto your house and decide to move the computer into that bedroom -- no problem! You are allowed to do so. You don't have to call to reactivate."
Gates assured the skeptical developers that users have demanded that Microsoft implement this new technology into their products so that Microsoft products continue to operate at the highest possible levels of performance.
Later that same afternoon, Gates announced that beta 25 of Microsoft's new
Gates also indicated that eventually copies of Visual Studio.NET will include the GPS technology. "Although we're restricting the area in which developers can use the software. Instead of the 100 feet we offer home users, we came to the decsion that most developers sit at one desk and at one computer for days, weeks, sometimes years at a time. So users of VS.NET (beta 25) will be allowed a 2 foot GPS radius."
Steve Ballmer added that the two feet of space allows developers to shift their computer from one end of the desk to the other. "Sometimes, um," Ballmer explained, "you get the sun in your eyes or you need a change of view. So we figured, two feet was a good GPS radius."
Developers who move outside the two foot radius will face the following fines:
- $150 first-time offense charge.
- $50 for every minute your activated Video Studio remains outside of the GPS coordinates.
- $250 processing fee for processing credit card fines.
- $500 mandatory training fee (one-time only). Offenders will be required to go to the nearest MSDN GPS office and sit through a 12 hour licensing awareness seminar. They will have the option of writing a 25 page "piracy awareness" paper or paying a $1500 flat-fee (non-refundable) convenience fee. Food will not be provided. Developers are asked to bring their own beverages, pens, and paper. The 25 page seminar paper must be completed before leaving the seminar. Armed guards will be posted at the door.
- Successful "converted" offenders will be among the first to receive
Why should the general public take over the job of the police that are being paid to protect us? If I'm having a heart attack, and my wife is frantically trying to get me to the hospital, wouldn't being "voted off" the interstate for 5 minutes because some people didn't agree with my wife's driving seem a little ridiculous? It's not up to the public to make these decisions. The public should be able to alert authorities. They can do that already. If you have a cell phone and are driving along the interstate, you can hit *lsp (in Louisiana) and get a state trooper to help you with your problem. Anarchy, mob rule went out with the caveman.
Get a couple of buddies. Hop into 3-4 cars. Get beside each other, and enforce the speed limit by blocking all lanes. Instant traffic jam.
After a couple of days like this, govt will be begging you to increase the speed.
Remember, when you are downloading MP3's, you are downloading communism!!!
badness 10000
The way I see it, if they don't want you to speed in THEIR car, it's their right. But since it seems that most people drive over the speed limit, they are sure to loose a lot of customers over this. (esp. return customers, after they've been slapped with fines...)
In case anyone is interested, the State of Connecticut found the practice illegal and has asked Acme to voluntarily sign a cease and desist order: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010702/tc/car_re ntal_gps_speeding_fines_illegal_1.html
The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
Really? How do you park?
Driver: But there must be something I can do about this! I can't go 55! My livelihood depends on being the fastest thing on the road!
Lawyer looks puzzled by this statement, then shrugs.
Lawyer: Well, sir, you could always go with another rental company.
Driver: Another...huh? What do you mean? There aren't any other companies. ACME is all there is!
Lawyer stops dead; he is completely at sea. A pause.
Lawyer: I beg your pardon, Mr. Coyote?
There's the other problem... "mostly" accurate... Most speedometers today aren't analog anymore. They are digital, and plugged into the PCM. Power spikes can screw the thing up, or just random hiccups. I've seen peoples speedometer go haywire for a brief second before. Especially if you have a digital readout and/or a headup type display, or just the digital readout on the on-board computer, ala BMW... I've seen my friends M3 have hiccups like this before.
And of course, the obvious issue of jurisdiction. If Acme can charge a customer for going over 55mph in a car, what about an everyday citizen driving down the road? Can I pull them over, or track them down using their license plate and slap them with a fine at will? An everyday citizen could prove they were speeding by matching their speed, checking it on their own GPS and printing the result. (seems kind of lengthy and roundabout...but possible none-the-less) One of the duties of a traffic officer is to keep the roadways safe. I for one doesn't want to see my hard earned tax dollars wasted by a company that wants to regulate their customer's speed themselves. If that is the case...then how about a tax credit?
Just a thought...
Whatever man, I spelled it write!
well, the fact is that you will probably not find a better performance bargain in the world better than the Corvette. Astom Martins, Ferrari, Benz, BMW in all their flavors cost much more that the Vette. Despite the performance, the Vette will never sell in Europe as it is way too thirsty for the market, and the type of people who could afford the petrol don't make up a huge part of the car market, thus importing the car to Europe not worth the trouble.
THe guys still has the right to drive at whatever speed he likes... As long as he pays for it. If I had to rent my own car, me too, I would likely wonder where my car has been, and make sure proper care has been followed. Now, the technology is capable of all this! :)
Also, if I'm charging for out of state driving, I will like to have a report of all out of state violation.
And more... Sometimes, insurance contract have provisions in case of dangereous driving. If the guy had been in an accident and the GPS had shown he was driving at 100 mph, he could have be paying for all cars damages!
If I had really misunderstood the contract, and also been a long time customer of the rental cie, I would explain the situation to the manager and expect him to write-off those fees, if he wants to keep my busine$$.
note to self:
:)
read fine print
If I for some unfortunate reason ended up renting from company that has this in their policy, I would simply leave the car in 1st gear for the entire trip. Problem solved...
I wrote the story about James Turner's lawsuit against Acme rental. Seems the story hit "the big time," (MSNBC, talk shows, blah blah blah) meaning the facts have been ignored. I just need to get this out somehow. CNN picked up on the story and has since misinformed the public about this case. The "reporter" wrote that on the contract, "in big bold letters" that speeding is defined as 79 mph. CNN also said that Turner initialed it. This is not true. The contract only read that "vehicles driving in excess of posted speed will be charged $150 fee per occurance. All our vehicles are GPS equipped." Speed limits vary from state to state! Asside from the contractual issue, Acme is in a poor area of town. The lawyer said his client is sick of losing cars. So they write a speeding warning at the top of the contract and assume people will understand what GPS is. It's not explained. Would this ever happen in a tony section of town with well-to-do clients? There's alot more issues at stake here besides speeding. And don't believe everything you read. Thanks.