Slashdot Mirror
UK to Put Monitors in Every Car?
wackoman2112 writes "The Sun is reporting that the UK government has plans to put a computerised spy in every car. This "spy" will record every single time a motorist goes slightly over the speed limit, into a bus lane, or stops on a yellow line! It will report this information to roadside sensors and you will soon receive a fine in the mail."
It seems to me that people *need* a certain amount of flexibility in the law.. Something this rigid is bound to fail...it simply goes too far against human nature.
I hope this doesn't come to Canada, I have enough trouble with the few red light/photo radar cameras giving me tickets. If they gave me one every single time I sped...I'd need to win the lottery...every day!
Gibble: Descriptive of an emotional state in which one's mind is scrabbling for some purchase on reality
Do you have any fucking idea what "The Sun" is?
Implied: why bother linking to any of their crap?
I want to see people get irate like Snipes in the phone booth in Demolition Man. Maybe slashbots can start a movement to bring back cryogenically frozen nerds to combat our evil oppressors.
Nobody has a right to drive a car over the speed limit, or to shoot a red light: provided suitable privacy protections are put in place, what exactly is wrong with this proposal?
.. this is an egregious invasion of privacy and an example of a Big Brother nanny-state stepping way over its bounds in its attempts to monitor the citizens. On the other hand, this will probably save thousands of lives each year.
The question is the balance: Is the loss of privacy worth the saved lives? I have my doubts.
No way... Are people's liberties going to be trampled that bad? Would we have to explain every single infraction? "The truck was on my arse so I had to speed up" or "I swerved into the bus lane to miss the dog". The possibilities are endless. And that's just for having legitimate excuses for every time you "break the law". What's scarier is that this is even a possibility. This just paves the way to have video cameras mounted in every car "to ensure your personal safety" or whatever. Kinda frightening if you ask me.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
And people say the United States is Orwellian!
If they're going to be that way about it, they'd be better off having the road sensors set the speed of the car, making speeding impossible.
Cool! All you need to do is swipe a sensor from the side of the road, reverse engineer the signals in your garage, and sniff your neighbor's/enemies' signature, and you can bankrupt them with traffic tickets!
There's a reason human beings do this in the US- one because it's always open to interpretation, and two- we have to have a job like traffic cop for the jerks in our society.
A Dutch minister has suggested the idea to install a cruse control (with speed limit) in every car. Aside from this there have been experiments here in the Netherlands with such a cruse control that would limit the speed based on GPS data and a database.
Amazing--- something crappy going on in the UK and you manage to twist it to somehow be Bush's fault. You Bush haters are amuzing.
[FromTheMorning]
The Sun is a tabloid rag, concerned only with tittle-tattle, gossip, celebrity "revelations" and salacious pictures. It is not a newspaper and I wouldn't ever think of using it as the basis for a sensible discussion on any issue. Someone find a reference to this "story" in a real newspaper and we can talk about it.
Rob.
Given the nature of the paper this story orignated in, I'd say the story should be taken with a grain of salt.
I toggled a toggle and buttoned a button, but when I got done, I was done doin' nothin'.
Well at least they are coming out and saying it. Here in the US they trick us into using EZ-Pass because without it, some of these highways are brutal to navigate. Sure, it only pays your tolls, for now. Sure, it's only optional, for now.
It's the only surefire way to get the sheeple to wake up to the chilling potential of some of the newer data-collecting techniques the government is implementing. They all say "I have done nothing wrong, I have nothing to hide.." BS. EVERYONE does something wrong and we all have something to hide.
the only interesting thing in "The Sun" is the page 3 models.
Overreaction, as usual, by the Sun. I'm not even going to finish reading this diatribe, I don't buy it, not even for the UK. All of this is easier accomplished by roadside cameras, and has the same basic flaw - it wont hold up in court.
At any rate, you have the right to a day in court, and to face your accuser. Unless this tattler box can show up to testify against you, your case will be thrown out.
So once again some loudmouth says something stupid or sarcastic, and the Sun jumps all over it like its the next big story. Those guys are almost as bad as slashdot when it comes to fact checking.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I ride a motorcycle, so nyah nyah.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
Is one of the UKs most notorious tabloid rags. Take the article with a big pinch of salt.
I can't think of anything witty right now
The government cites a reduction in crime and help in tracking down terrorists as a benefit of this system. But as with gun control, it is only the law-abiding citizens that get penalized - criminals can buy black market/unregistered firearms, and terrorists can drive older cars that don't feature the new chip.
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. -Oscar Wilde
I wish SCO would charge the UK government $699 for each monitor.
With the disclaimer that the Sun is a rag and can't really be believed I can imagine this would be met with a similar response to the Poll tax in the UK. Why should people stand for such blatent money grabbing government interference in their day to day lives.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
It's a terrible, terrible newspaper with a reputation for making up half of what they print and not checking the rest.
They also have severe disagreements with the government and are not above lying to score political points.
This might be true, but a second and more reputable source would be better.
How stupid. Period.
Where is the judgement here? What if I swerve to miss a deer? What if I have an emergency? Is the maintenance of this thing and calibration my responsibility or the governments?
Looks like you're guilty until proven innocent again.
Great use of tax money... NOT! Are the societal costs of these problems so freakin' high that this is the best answer? Are there not other more pressing issues? Are the police too busy chasing online file traders that they can't police the roads any more?
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
... putting a computerized spy in every police car and such!
So if you rights are violated, you will get a fat settlement check in the mail automatically as well.
Eventually we all will have "legal bots" fighting each other in the depths of the Legal Network.
i hope they enforce this system in the US of A, it is bound to be easily fuckable with.
...I am here to take your daughter for dance.
Sure Son, here, Take my car.
Keep in mind that this is a British tabloid that is doing the reporting. The genre is notorious for fluff, demagoguery, and "sports dailies" that are basically half sports, half softcore porn. I'd hope to see something a bit more solid verifying this story before I worried too much about it.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
... that this spy cam will only be used for monitoring speed limit, & not for some nefarious motive? The opportunities are endless, if such a public spy-cam system is compromised.
I am sorry.. but I don't buy that for one second. We all talk about how privacy is being removed.. and maybe someday this will happen... but not anytime soon. People will not allow it. The government can't seriously do something like that. It isn't financially viable.
Yeah, detect when a motorist goes faster than the speed limit and.. crash him to hell!!
DVD Ripping, Divx, VCD, SVCD under Linux
and thought of car MP3 players, or playstation hookups?
Must be one of those euro word thingies.
Quoth the article:
The scheme would force car makers to fit the microchip in all new vehicles. Older cars would have them added during an MOT
and
Car registration and MOT details would be carried on every chip, making stolen or uninsured vehicles simpler to trace.
WTF is an 'MOT'?
What happens when you sell a vehicle? What incentive would the lot or private citizen have to ensure that the registration information on the chip is changed?
How about home-brew programmers that either remove all restrictions or change the registration to that of someone else? How about everyone change their on-chip registration to Prince Charles?
Unfortunately, the article doesn't go into any technical details.
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
But isn't using the word "spy" just sensationalising it? Spy infers it's unknown or sneaky. This may be unpopular, unethical, maybe even illegal, but it isn't spying - people know it is there.
But The Sun is there to sell newspapers (and doing a mighty fine job of it last I saw their sales figures) not to report accurately or fairly.
Read reviews of shopping cart software
This is great - what if you need to break one of these laws to prevent an accident?
Say (for example) someone doesn't see you, and cuts you off in traffic - you have two options.. you can swerve into the bus lane, or let them hit you (stopping traffic, raising your insurance rates, possibly causing injury)
I can see it now - if someone pisses you off in traffic, you just force them into a bus lane.. a month later, they get a fine!
Yeah, that's real fair.
Why should we be using police officers to enforce traffic laws when technology can do it better? Would not a better use of their time and training be preventing violent crime? Traffic enforcement is so randomly enforced now that many feel they can get away with it. If this can reduce traffic fatalities and put more police back in the communities to prevent serious violent crime, then I am all for it.
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
I'm sure there will be someway to disable this system =)
just my 2
Ok, this is something they should put into Demolition Man 2!
Sylvester: "I'll catch that bastard!" (pushes the pedal)
*beep*
Sylvester: "What the heck was that?"
*beep*
Sandra: "It's the AutoFine(tm), you were driving too fast"
Sylvester: "but what was the second beep?"
Sandra: "You said heck"
*beep*
If you really want people to obey the laws you don't do something stupid like send them tickets all the time. Its much more logical to just have these monitors and sensors be capable of only allowing the car to go an acceptable speed, no more. That would seem to be almost as easy as this and prevent all those stupid tickets and big government that goes along with this kind of thing.
They could then build the lane stuff in so that it beeps if you are in a wrong lane and if you stay there over so many seconds it reports it.
Crazy stuff.
1. Leak a highly controversial new policy to the media
2. Wait for the reaction
3. If it's overtly hostile, shelve the policy and deny all knowledge
4. ???
5. Get re-elected!
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
The only people that will complain about this are the people who routinely break the traffic laws. I know I wouldn't speed anymore if I knew it would result in an automatic ticket. Same as P2P really. It was all fun and games when you couldn't get in trouble for doing it. Then when the RIAA started suing people they wised up and started to realize that the chance of getting in trouble was too great to risk. I haven't used a P2P app in months. It's just not worth sacrificing a clean criminal record and my future employment opportunities to download some crappy music. I think the federal government should mandate these monitors in US cars by 2005 and provide funding for the roadside sensors.
NO, really.
"No Mum, I left with plenty of time to get home by curfew..."
"Really? Then why did I just get a bloody speeding ticket in the mail?"
Yeah, I can definitely see the upside to that... /sarcasm
+5, Female
Name one thing you could legally do in the States before Sept. 11 that you can't now.
Snip, snip, no electrons for sensor power supply.
No report, no fine.
Or maybe just pull a fuse or relay.
Or maybe Lucas (of MG & old Jaguar electrical fame) will be producing the system, so it will stop functioning by itself very quickly...
btw-car fans, I as well believe Jag and MG had many redeeming values... just not the elecrical system.
~8^]
Are we supposed to believe that the government knows where all the bus lanes are? Or all the speed restriction signs for that matter.
The UK Post service is inundated with more than three times the usual number of letters to carry...
I can see these little black boxes being used in cases where death / serious injury occurs, and the data is used to determine the exact cause (as has already happened in the USA). But, can you imagine the number of infractions that would be reported on a daily basis? There are bound to be errors and mistakes. Seems like a huge headache waiting to happen.
--JP
The facts expressed here belong to all, the opinions to me. The distinction between fact and opinion is yours to decide.
Hacking & Wardriving -
:-
..... AKA The Sledgehammer)
New definitions
1) A Hacker is now someone who frequently changes lane. - (the old term Hacking is now called "pacifing technology")
2) Wardriving is driving after having pacified the monitoring technology. And (if implemented) it should push the value of those vehicles up a few notches.
(insane sounding laughs rebound all around as he reaches for his "pacify all" tool
On a serious note - those with antique cars should be safe from this attack of sheer stupidity.
I, for one, welcome our new Nanny State overlords.
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
...Bat Boy will be on tour in support of Patriot Act II. Now that's something to talk about!
Uh, expect a warrant?
If you believe the utter bollocks The Sun comes out with, you may as well pay $699 for a SCO Liecense.
--Mods giveth, Mods taketh away--
I'd much rather have a car that takes me from A to B and follows the rules of the road so I don't have to. Please spend the research money on that instead.
I'm an American, and I know my government does all kinds of rotten things, mostly without widespread public knowledge. But why do we regularly hear about the latest insane plan in the UK to clamp down on people's independence/privacy? In most advanced democracies, governments can't get away with making proposals that piss off the general populace. I know the words are in our constitution, not yours, but it doesn't sound like "government by the people." Seriously, this isn't a troll. I'd just like to hear a local perspective on this. Do parties/officials that make these proposals actually survive the next election? For example, recently here a spook from the Reagan era was finally sacked after having one too many lapses of insanity (search news.google.com for Poindexter).
This is obviously another application of RFID.
Whether it's approved or not, RFID will probably be in every car eventually, and if it's keyed to the Vehicle Identification Number which is in every automobile registration, it will be trivial to know who each car belongs to.
Put a few RFID detectors by the side of the road (or embedded in the road), measure the time it takes to go between two of them and you have the system described in the article.
...was for Polls. Do we hear from the Weekly World News next?
Our "reporters" have concrete proof! CmdrTaco and the other /. gang are really ALIEN SPIES sent to confuse us with off posts once in a while. And the rumors that Cowboy Neal is actually Elvis? We're checking up on that.
Meanwhile be sure and check out our latest Page 3 darling!
It would take approximately 2 hours after this passes for an entrapenuer to board and airplane and set up shop in Mexico.
This shop would produce circumvention kits, which would be banned from import, yet be strangely available via flea markets, and some "grey-area" mail order catalogs.
It would eventually require the continual inspection of automobiles to verify that the devices haven't been circumvented. And in the US, a car has become so much part of the identity of "being American", that people would consider even inspecting the system an attack on their civil liberties.
But then again, should the US Gov. indicate that it is necessary because suspected terrorists could be using vechiles (aka cars) to plan their next grocery store outing, I'd fully expect it to pass with full approval.
Cynical? No! Not me! hahahahaha....
It is interesting to me that the British seem to be leading the way in staggeringly invasive electronic law enforcement. Can someone in the know lend some insight as to what it is about the character of the UK government (and people) that is behind these efforts?
I ask because in the U.S., electronic law enforcement is basically about establishing and maintaining revenue streams. Any penalties involving fines pretty much boil down to corruption machines and stealth taxes, so when you see this sort of thing pop up over here, you usually have only to follow the money to find out who or what is motivating it.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
In SOVIET RUSSIA, your crime reporting car drives YOU!
Once known as the country that taxes everything, the UK will now be known as the country that fines everything.
...this scheme would only enforce the law, if you don't like the law, you should try and change it, not fight against its effective enforcement... or like me, ride a bike.
foo mane padme hum
why don't they spend more money on automatically driving the car safe FOR you rather than automatically punishing you? i smell a need for revenue.
Runnin' On Empty
I find it interesting that the pro-government newspaper (this is a tabloid rag) should be so anti regarding the idea
It's nothing but rabble rousing. Just what the currant bun loves a bit of - especially when the mercury's on the high side.
I find it interesting that the government is considering abolishing the license fee.
All things in moderation; including moderation
..annoy that many potential voters.
Forget it, this idea (in its present form) is a total non-starter.
Don't blow up buildings and commit acts of terrorism and you'll have nothing to worry about.
I would never want to live in the UK, with thier slow driving, T.V taxes, crappy weather, and gun control it would be downright unbearable.
This is a test comment. Do not respond.
I would absolutely *love* to see something like this introduced in the UK - people there (and pretty much anywhere else) drive like fscking idiots!
Of course - it'll never happen and as many have pointed out, the Sun is a complete and utter rag! But I do not understand why car drivers think that the laws laid down don't *actually* apply or have any meaning.
A little planning goes a long way...
...because I read the first line and saw that it was in fact the Great British, King of Tabloid, Morning Trap-4 Comic - The Sun.
The parent missed out that this is a Tits 'n Arse paper chocked full of celebrity gossip and this is the reason is sells so well.
It is a working class paper with working class opinions. One of their columnists is 'White Van Man' which is laughable and sums up the readership easily.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
Since it's Britain, I would assume MOT to mean, "Ministry of Transportation."
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
Finally a good reason for all and sundry to dump the cars and go to bicycles!! If you are not fit enough, then you will be watched. I do agree with the Sun arguments.
!
Kind of reminds me of the fifth element...
Car Computer: You have 5 points left on your licence.
Korben Dallas: Yes. Thank-you for reminding me
When you start slagging the Page3 girls, *THAT* is when the gloves come off! ;)
Anyone interested in issues surrounding driving in the UK, esp. the anti car madness which is around at the moment, should have a look at SafeSpeed. Lots of interesting information regarding cameras, police targets, why driving fast isn't necessarily dangerous, etc.
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
Actually, he seemed to seek-out his big buddy bill clinton's advice quite a bit...
And no, I can't seem to remember my password right now. Guess I'm a "coward" [cowers fearfully]
Forgetting for a second that this is the Sun, one of the bastions of journalistic integrity (sic), let's assume the proposal is legitimate.
First, the monitoring of citizens fundamentally alters the ethos of government, specifically democratic government, since it shifts the base of power away from citizens and places it firmly with the government.
Second, strict enforcement of traffic laws, without consideraton for circumstance, is not justice.
The Sun? I'd expect the Slashdot editors to show a little more discretion than that.
:)
Oh, wait....
That's very generous.. Does anyone know if they'll be TFT or CRT?
And topless girls on page 3.
So are you saying that The Sun is a good paper?
We've already got this on the way in the USA. OBD-III (on-board diagnostics 3) is a scheme proposed by the EPA and various other government agencies to "protect the environment." Right now, every new car has OBD-II, which constantly monitors your vehicle for emissions compliance. Wonderful, huh? Well OBD-III will incorporate a satellite transmitter in every car...if your car goes out of spec, the government will know who you are...and have the authority to revoke your registration until you get it fixed. They will also have the ability to stop your car from starting, or stop it entirely if you are determined to be a criminal or environmental outlaw. Plans are already afoot to interface the system with "smart signs"...so you could be issued a ticket directly from a "SPEED LIMIT 55" sign...for going 56. The future is here! Limitless revenue for the government!
Hi
1 76-7905 12,00.html
An article in a similar vein, though less inflammatory I would hope (I've not read the one in the sun) appeared in the Sunday Times on the 24th.
There is a link from:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,
May need to register if you are outside the UK I'm afraid.
Nobody has a right to drive a car over the speed limit, or to shoot a red light: provided suitable privacy protections are put in place, what exactly is wrong with this proposal?
You are correct to the extent that nobody has a right to put others safety at danger, but that is a far cry from saying that nobody has a right to drive over the speed limit, use a bus lane, park in an unauthorized space, or what not.
It is also a far cry from saying that the government should be so Orwellian. The right to privacy means nothing if it does not mean the right to privacy from government, or privacy only because they permit it thru policy.
IMHO, them Brits need to be more embracing of the "right to bear arms". You'd be amazed how much things can change when the government is made to realise who is supposed to have controll and who isn't.
I know I'm feeding a troll here, but just in case:
all those thousands of captives we have are suspected terrorists, no proof (or burdon to show any), no access to lawyers, no right or even expectation to a trial.
This can now be applied to YOU. Check out the wrong library book, or even make a personal enemy with someone in the FBI (maybe you flirted with his girlfriend or wife a while back??)
worst law... ever.
it's crap
It is an offence to drive without insurance over here.
Use Python
Linus Torvalds will be the next Page 3 girl. C'mon folks...would this story be here if this were the Weekly World News reporting it? The Sun really isn't much better
DeviantArt Page
NSFWSome have commented that The Sun is not the world's most authoritative journal available in the ok. You're right, it's not.
However, similar articles have been in the broadsheets over here:
The Times
BBC News
The Observer (this one slightly older)
It'd be so utterly hopelessly fallible that they'd pull the plug on it in months and we'd never see its like again. We just don't have the technology for this level of snooping, and anybody who thinks about this story for more than five seconds will realise as much and carry on.
For those of you not familiar with The Sun's "journalism, go check out their website for your taste of Great British Journalism. This is the paper which brought you such great headlines as "Freddie Starr Ate My Hamster", folks.
I'm afraid this was reported in the Sunday times on the 24th: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-7905 12,00.html
Non UK residents may need to register.
People will routinely drive at dangerous rates of speed and will perform high-speed sudden manoeuvers that leave virtually no margin for error.
Such behaviour has to be eradicated.
The installation of constant-monitoring tele-downloadable event recorders is most certainly a nice step in this direction, the goal being to eliminate the bad drivers from the road.
* * *
Some years ago, in a project management class, the teacher's day job was project manager for a prestigious law enforcement agency. Our teams had to prepare a project description for law-enforcement purposes. My idea was to have such a system implemented.
Needless to say, it didn't fly high with my team-mates, but the professor's reaction was quite interesting:
Well, it's about time!!!http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3178579.stm
The original article was in the Sunday Times, which has a better reputation than the Sun.
I admit to not having read the article, but an automated system that doesn't take into account ALL of the data of the circumstance would be flawed.
Like so:
I see the vehicle behind me go out of control. It is headed for me and likely to damage my vehicle and/or injure/kill myself or my passengers. As a result, I (correctly) instinctively stomp the gas, thereby avoiding an MVA (multi-vehicle accident). With this system, I get penalized for not getting into a potentially lethal accident...
-------------------------
As easy as herding cats!
Next week we'll hear from the Weekly World News that the end of the world is near and that Bat Boy is the antichrist. Just going to the link for the Sun posted in this article proves to me it's just like the American version....total crap. Besides, even if it was true, how would you account for no GPS reception and VALID reasons for swerving onto the berm like if you were about to hit someone or someone was going to hit you?
Gorkman
"The Sun" is purely a troll publication, just looking to spark controversy. At least let's discuss from a reliable publication, like "The Enquirer" or "The Weekly World News". Better yet, how about this one!
Ruby on Rails Screencast
.. to do your civic duty and protest this like there's no tomorrow. Otherwise, when our goverment sees you people roll over and take it, they will want to try the same things here. Set a good example for us all!
I would imagine this will only apply on motorways for now but it might make a nicve change from a fixed road tax like we already have.
Extended Warranty? How can I lose!
The fact that something like this has been reported in "The Sun" really isn't a justifiable reason to believe that it is at all likely to happen. I used to read quite a lot of UK newspapers (I live there) and I have seen this or a very similar story published before, and nothing has ever happened about it. I fully expect the same thing to happen this time.
I am actually in favour of cracking down on people who recklessly break the law, but I think monitoring people's speed this way is not the way to go. For example, I know many people who would not think twice before doing speeds in excess of 50mph in a 30mph limit zone, these people could do with receiving punishment for such a thing. But IMO there is nothing wrong with doing 80/90mph along a country lane in the dark (the safest time - you can see traffic a long way off - and there is much less of it) providing, you, the car and the road can all handle that sort of speed. I would never consider doing speeds in excess of the limit in heavily populated areas. [for those of you who are not aware the speed limit on such roads is 60mph].
If this kind of technology is going to be introduced into vehicles in this country, then fair enough, thats the way its going to be, I think it would certainly take away some of the fun of driving, but in some ways I would rather know that I am being 'watched' constantly rather than having to keep looking to see where the speed camera is hidden.
BTW, WTF!!! is this colour scheme, its kind of maroon and puke yellow. its making me feel quite ill!!!!!
FYI I didn't RTFA - its the sun, there's nothing to read in the sun.
.sigs are for losers
Of course slashdot does (mostly) have a consistent viewpoint on "civil liberties". But if we leave that part out of your message, it seems to me these sentences could easily apply to the site this comment is posted on.
.Furry cows moo and decompress.
What is it about the British that they seem willing to lie down and have all privacy and freedom taken away from them?
But, British being the clever Poms they are, I give it five days after the first units get installed before someone figures out how to h4x0r them into reporting lawful driving no matter what's really going on.
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
This has me thinking about the automated wireless toll technology that helps us speed through the toll payment lines from DC to NY. :bigbro
Will we get tickets in the mail that say you speeded from point A to point B because it does a little simple math?
hmmmm...more revenue..tasty
Since the Sun is always heavy on opinion and light on fact, I looked up the stuff it was talking about.
There is currently an EU wide project looking into Electronic Vehicle Identification. ACPO (the UK's association of chief police officers) is just one of the bodies involved:
"Ministries of Transport of Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK, as well as ACPO (UK), KLPD (Netherlands), RDW (Netherlands), Q-Free (Norway), EFKON (Austria), TNO (Netherlands), ERTICO."
(Hardly a pet project of Blairs then?) I think the report referred to is this one which is part of a requirements gathering exercise, not a policy document. Here's a one of the requirements (Section 5, User Needs):
"The issues of privacy, safety, and security must be clear and understandable if the public are to have any confidence in the system. ("Big Brother" concerns by invasion of privacy by authorities)"
I don't think much of Blair and the lickspittles he has running the country just now, but the Sun is just about the bottom of the journalistic barrel, you might want to read the report and judge for yourself.
Drivers will only be allowed to breathe five times per journey according to new EU guidelines (The Sun is a xenophobic tabloid).
--
Nobody has a right to drive a car over the speed limit, or to shoot a red light: provided suitable privacy protections are put in place, what exactly is wrong with this proposal?
And nobody is saying that someone has a right to break traffic codes. However, sometimes people need to break them, in order to prevent something worse.
Even with "privacy" protection, the issue is that there is no context for something like this..
For the red light sensor: Suppose you're stopped at a red light, and there's a bicycle behind you.. someone hits the cyclist from behind, forcing him under your car. There is no traffic in the intersection..
So, do you A) Immediately move your car forward so that the cyclist doesn't die?
or B) Wait until the light turns green, safe in the knowledge that the cylcist's next-of-kin understand that it was OK for him to die, because saving his life would have meant breaking the law?
For the bus lane (and speed limit):
You are driving in heavy traffic, and you hear a siren. There is enough room for you in the bus lane, but not for the fire engine Do you:
A) Pull into the bus lane, allowing the fire engine to pass so they can put out the fire and save the lives of the 20 people trapped in the burning building?
or
B) Keep driving, not speeding up (which would get you a ticket), and not allowing the fire engine to pass, safe in the knowledge that you won't get a ticket, but saying "well, those poor people died, but at least nobody broke the speed limit or bus lane rules"?
Wait until the Muslims take over the world through overpopulation and terrorism. Then we'll really wonder what happened to our rights. Also, we'll wonder what happened to all those infidels (genocide).
Hahaha for those of you who don't live in the UK - "The Sun" newspaper is a fithy rag of a tabloid.
They frequently lie and make up stupid stories.
Don't believe a word of it.
Last.fm - join the social music revolution
I want this to become standard. Then a week later, once it has been reverse engineered, we can all remove the boxes from our cars. And since there will be such an influx of people who don't have a clue how to do this themselves and get away with it the system will never notice that I'm not ever getting ticketed.
Why? Because I don't ever break the law? No, just because it is never reported.
And since the system will be perfect there will be no oversight and no body will ever report someone breaking the law because of course they will assume that they will automatically be reported.
Yes... bring this on!
42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
If this were happening in the US, the question would be whether companies who would find this the most useful, such as companies who have fleets of drivers, would find it worth the public outcry. It also brings up the question- is this the direction in which we want to go? There are certainly arguments in favour- lives saved is one of them. Drunk driving is another. But from there we go back to civil liberties again. Do we have the right to unmonitored transport? Do we have the right to make our own driving choices?
More important than either of those, this runs straight into a question of, is it right to have a fine issued without human intervention? Because some of the problems then become... what if my car was stolen? What if I'm speeding because there's a woman having a baby in the backseat? If a cop stops the car in those situations, they can offer support by recognising your car and being witness to who was driving, or in the latter case, calling an ambulance, and frequently the fine will be waived. Human crises do tend to get some laxity where the low is concerned, because other people tend to acknowledge them.
Here's another interesting note, even beyond the question of whether a device that reports on speeding and yellow lines can report on your location under the Patriot Act.... In Vermont, at least when i lived there two years ago, it was not illegal to cross a double yellow line unless there was a posted restriction saying so. The rest of the time, the cop might get you for recless endangerment, but the yellow lines officially meant, "Passing is not recommended in this area."
Point being, the states have enough law changes that some of those reported issues will not be applicale. Do they then get turned off? I'm treating all this as a hypothetical question, of course, and will look for the same story elsewhere before i treat it as otherwise. It reminds me of the debate over automatic-track cars, the ones which do the driving for you over an electric strip, etc. The question then was- if your car can automatically go where it's told, can there be stops to which you can't go? to which no one can go but a few select people? It was interesting then, and it's interesting now. Not enough to make me put together a tinfoil hat, but interesting nonetheless.
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
Rule #1 for dating my daughter: Keep your head low & run in a zigzag pattern.
"Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
It's a bloody Sun article. It's not exactly quality journalism - right up there with the Daily Mail for having no idea how to separate opinion from news.
They just hate anything that costs drivers money - speed cameras etc.
"But hundreds of thousands of ordinary drivers will be nabbed for stupid minor offences. "
Well duh, if you break the law you should be fined. Is it OK to speed as long as you don't get caught? No, of course not. Just ignore the crappy tabloid.
How do we stop urban sprawl?
I thought it would be democracy in the middle east that would lead to $5/gal. gas that would send us back to the urban centers.
Looks like it will be our refusual to drive that will lead us to mass transit, that will lead to tracking public transit, that will lead us to walking.
In the U.S, it will be a John Ashcroft, not a Spencer Abrahams that will cut down on global warming.
I can see SO MANY areas where a mandated speed control would be outright dangerous. There would be no ability to use speed to out-manoeuvre a dangerous situation. If you were ever in a situation of having to outrun a stalker, you wouldn't be able to. The list goes on.
Not only would it be dangerous, but it would be annoying, too. Want to pass somebody going 3kph below the speed limit on a 2 lane road? Fogetaboutit.
www.clarke.ca
(Please mod this up before the thread dies!!)
Nobody believes stuff printed in The Sun, but occasionally it does pass on info found in more reputable papers the day before!
The original story is linked here from Times Online for your pleasure.
Well then, I guess I will be cancelling future trips to Britain. Or if I go, I'll only use taxis. Let the rental companies wither and die by this ridiculous scheme.
Nonsense. They preferred young Tone to the Tories for a while, but more recently they've been moving back to their traditional position.
too bad that speedometers aren't 100% exact. They simply display a sorta average of your speed. If it showed your exact speed while driving, the needle would jump around much quicker. (not quite as quick as the Tach, but it wouldn't be as smooth as it is now). This means that people who honestly believe they are going the speed limit may inadvertantly go a mile or two over (esp if they are accelerating quickly, then ease off right at the limit)
if you have GPS that can calculate speed, check it against your speedometer and you will see what I mean. (I didn't believe this either, till one of my friends used his GPS to prove it. Also, it would likely depend on how fine a resolution and how quickly your GPS refreshes... however, I am not a GPS expert by any means, esp since googling produces various opinions. some say that it's the error in the speedometer, some say it's intentional error in the GPS)
Monitoring people, in my opinion, seems a very untrusting way to do business. It automatically assumes that the observed need to be closely watched, creating a rather suspect environment. (I won't start screaming big brother, don't worry. You can argue this without invoking Orwell)
I don't know how the UK relys on speeding tickets as sources of income, but I am reminded of a story from florida. AAA near a florida town put up signs 6 miles outside the city that warned motorists of the 'speed trap' ahead in order to keep the speeding down. The local cops said that the signs were not allowed. Their reason? Revenues due to speeders were going down. In short, people were slowing down. You would think the cops would have been happy, right? No, they were upset because they claimed that they received 40% of the town budget and 105% of the police budget through fines. So, basically, they publically stated that they wanted people to speed. yea, yea, I know that's obvious, but I never dreamed in a million years that they would actually admit it. And what baffled me further was that hardly anyone cared! Their attitude was, "Of course that's why they don't want the signs there" instead of "isn't it outrageous that the cops actually admitted that!!"
My point of relating this story is, if the UK is simply doing this to generate new revenue, it's a very very shady deal. I think it reeks of greed and a dash of corruption, the privacy issues set aside. Also, what about those times when you *have* to speed? perhaps a car comes barralling down the road behind you and you need a quick burst of speed to avoid a collision? What about passing (overtaking). yea, I know you aren't supposed to go over the speed limit when you do that, but if you don't, passing is rather tough. I myself don't pass much, but when I do, I try to limit myself to 5mph over the speed limit.
-John
"The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and hoping for different results"
Attention Portlanders! Schmizza now delivers according to their website!
Help us build a better map!
It has always struck me as strange that:
The speed limit here (in Toronto, Canada) is 100 KPH.
All cars have speedometers that go to 180 KPH and higher.
People actually drive 120 KPH on the highway
-and-
The speed limit is an "absolute". If you're over, you are breaking the law.
Not only should there be sensors, but cars should have governors. The law *is* the law. If you don't like the law, vote and have your representative *change* the law.
However, if I get pulled over for driving 120 KPH, and all other highway traffic was doing the same speed, I feel that I should be able to forward the ticket to the automobile manufacturer for criminal facilitation. Because I can't, I feel that there is a de-facto conspiracy for raising taxes. (Note: In my entire driving "career" I have had only one speeding ticking, and no other infractions. I was not paying close attention to my speed, the highway was empty, and I was ticketed for 120KPH. No, the car did not have a cruise control, or I would have used it).
So, I not only want *detectors*, I want *governors*. Since we have the means, why should I pay tickets? The stated reason is safety (or gridlock prevention, or somesuch public good), and I presume that government officials aren't lying.
Ratboy
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Cool - then slashdotites can code en-route!
a ploy to make other legislation pass more easily that isn't as drastic
cruise control that would limit the speed based on GPS data and a database
Great. I was using a Garmin GPS V (higher grade consumer model) and the thing was constantly condfusing the 4 lane highway we were on with the 1 lane country road beside it. If that had been setting out speed we would have been run over within 5 minutes. Or even if it did know I was on a 5 lane freeway, the first time I crossed an overpass of a small road, the speed would instantaneously drop by 40 mph and cause a 50 car pileup.
And don't try to tell me the technology would improve. We have the technology for good GPS tracking. We have the technology for crystal clear cell phones. But to large organizations, better tech means "about the same performance but cheaper." It'd only be a matter of time before this failed.
This story is posted under the category"your rights online". What's the "online" aspect of this?
With the police freed from having to book and deal with this minor stuff they can move more officers onto protecting and investigating more dangerous crimes. Why should the cops have to spend their days trying to bust these people? They know they are breaking the road code, they know there are fines, and now they want to whine about losing that ability. No sympathy from me.
The privacy nut in me wonders about infriging uses of the technology, but with proper legislation that should be kept well under control. Think about it: a hit and run occurs in a back street at 11PM, check the records to see which cars were there at the time and question the suspects. Check the database to see where those cars are now and make sure they're not heading for the airport.
There is the potential to abuse this system, but it also has the potential to streamline the administration of these motoring infractions. As long as they build a little tolerence into the system it will not be draconian.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Jim Hacker: "Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers:
- The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
- The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
- The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
- The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
- The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
- The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
- And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is."
Sir Humphrey: "Prime Minister, what about the people who read the Sun?"
Bernard Woolley: "Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits."
No-one has the right to steal things either. Should you be getting an automatic courts summons as soon as you 'test' a grape in a grocery store?
Laws are always set more strictly than they are enforced. This allows leeway, and gives a greater rationale for coming down hard on people who step way over the line.
Sure, the speed limit might be 30, but they don't even twitch their nose until you're doing 36-40. Why? Because if the limit is 30, then prosecuting someone doing 40 is easy. If they set the limit to 39mph, then prosecuting that 40mph driver would seem unethical.
mogorific carpentry experiments
Sounds like one way to get more people into public transportation...
When I get some extra money, I'm planning on setting up a used laptop in my vehicle. I'll use it with GPS, to obtain traffic updates, and as an MP3 player, DVD player, and for various other things. I also may hook up cameras inside and outside the car and a mic on the inside. If the car's ever stolen, I can have that information uploaded to a server. You can also bet, though, that I'll be figuring out a way of erasing that information if the car is in an accident.
www.clarke.ca
I have always found it to be annoying that some places use EZ Pass, some use SmartTag/SmartPass, and some use Speedpass. I would love to see those all be consolidated. Maybe MasterCard should buy all those others and unify the whole thing...
Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
I would love to see every law on the books thoroughly enforced. Maybe then people would start paying attention to what goes on in the government instead of choosing blissful ignorance. You can bet that within a week of a law like this going into effect the speed limits will be raised.
Remember: Governments only do what people let them do.
Visit the
ITS has implemented web access controls for the Corporate Division to block web sites that are generally not business related. If you have an ongoing legitimate business need to access this site then you will need department head approval to unblock the site. Please send an e-mail message to your department head with the web site address and state the business reason access is required. Your department head should then forward the e-mail to the ITS Customer Support Center.
"...we dont care about the economics; we just want to be able to hack great stuff."
gotta love technology.. ten years ago they would have had to use midgets in your car with walkie talkies
Linux: Helping nerds look smarter since the late 90s.
They don't take custody of suspected terrorists for taking out library books, you stupid ass. Everyone one of those bastards in custody is there for multiple reasons ranging anywhere from hanging around the wrong people to purchasing large quantities of suspicious materials.
Fucking twit.
And this is coming from a rabid motorist! One inconsiderate asshole can fuck an intersection for everyone. They should also zap your ass if you proceed at a crawl through a busy intersection with many cars waiting behind you.
Blar.
I think it's about time we got rid of speed limits alltogether - let's face it most of the Great British public don't think speeding is a criminal offence anyway - what's so wrong with doing 50mph past a school over a zebra crossing at the kid's going home time, just makes the little buggers watch the road.
Every time there is a new technology for catching the dangerous speeding drivers there is a big outcry, first radar, then cameras, now the incar spy.
It seems to me that we don't want them so let's just have a free for all, and while were at it let's get rid of parking restrictions, most people seem to ignore them as well, what's wrong with parking on a pedestrian crossing, or just being a bloody nusance, cos you are too fat or lazy to walk from the carpark to the ATM.
I suspect we would have a 6 month period of on road carnage before the Sun runs a campaign to bring back speed limits.
A system like this would need some immediate feedback, not just a bill in the mail. "You've exceeded the speed limit by 20 kph. You will be fined an amount accordant with local law for this district." Even better, "You are exceeding the speed limit by 15 kph. If you continue to accelerate, you will breach the local speed limit laws enough to guarantee you a fine." Without this, you could never defend yourself in court, because you might not remember when you did it by the time your ticket arrives via snail mail.
On Board Diagnostics in the long hand. This is something that is required in every single new car sold in California. This mandate was set by CARB (California Air Resource Board) who are non-elected officials. They're the same ones who jack up our gas prices by requiring funny gas that "suppossedly" burns cleaner. Currently OBD is at level II. It monitors certain pieces of equipment on your car and when they go out of range you get a little flashing orange light on your dash that says "Check Engine." In essense, every piece of equipment that it checks is considered part of your smog system on the car (even things like axels) and if you are a car-modder it becomes increasingly difficult to bring aftermarket parts into the mix as the smallest detail can put the whole OBD II system out of whack. CARB has been trying to push OBD III through the system for years. OBD III like OBD II will monitor your car's smog systems, but it will also monitor speed and location. It will include a transmitter that sends this data to a central processing center. If anything goes out of whack you not only get the flashing light, you get a letter in the mail (probably from the DMV). I'm sure speeding will garner you a ticket, not to mention that every time you're in your car the government will be tracking you (an end to privacy). It's time to wake up. Plans are being developed to begin taxing our car mileage and our vehicle emissions. There have even been ideas bantered around that would restrict how far you can live from your place of work.
You wouldn't mind a link to The Sun's famous Page3, would you?
BWHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
*sniff* OMG my side hurts from laffing
could you imagine if this tried this in the "good old US of A" ?
on a more serious note.. why dont they attach something like this to the patriot act II? mabey then joe six pack and grandma ethel will finally start carring (instead of just geeks and librarians (the virgins of society))
The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
If they can put a sensor in a car that can tell when you cross a yellow line on the road, why can't they disable cell phones while the car is in motion? There's one I'd like to see.
---
Lousy rotten karmic retribution.
OH PLEASE! This is "Flamebait"???? Once again the Slash Mods NEED to pull their heads out of their asses. This guy has a point.
Police Cameras that have no effect on violent crime or terrorism, extensive "traffic monitoring" cameras and now this. Air Strip One is almost secrued.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I have long wondered, here in the USA, what would happen if speeding laws were actually thoroughly enforced. The politicians would not want that. People will take a certain amount of onerous tax like speeding fines, but no more, and the politicians and police are pretty good at judging the limit, to milk as many golden eggs as possible without killing the goose that lays them. I'd love to see real enforcement; so many people would clog the court system, and so many suspended licenses would cause a revolt in traffic laws. Politicians know that. I imagine any policeman who actually wrote speeding tickets all day long, as any of them could, would quickly learn a lesson from his boss.
Infuriate left and right
First, there should be a little gray area built in. It would not be hard to write a routine that would compare specific events to your recorded driving habits and decide whether to issue a summons. For instance, if one regularly drives within the speed limit, but occassionally excededs the limit for a brief period of time in order to pass safely or avoid an unsafe driver, they should not be penalized. Drivers who regularly excede the speed limit should be penalized.
Second, I have no quam with ticketing the owner of a vehicle. They are fundamentally (and legally) responsible for its safe and lawful operation.
I used to live in an apartment complex near a major highway. When that highway backed up, many drivers would drive at highway speed through the streets around the complex in order to bypass the traffic jam. I have been struck twice crossing the street by people who ignored a stop sign, knowing that cops were almost never there. Anyone who has lived in an area with 1) lots of pedestrians and 2) lots of drivers who skirt the law knows the sense of danger and would welcome anything that would bring a consequence to these drivers.
Let's start by putting one in every car driven my a Government minister, Member of Parliament and policeman, and by their families. If that works, we'll extend it to media people and sports stars.
If they approve after that, we can extend it to the peons.
Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
Make the bum walk or you will get a ticket in the mail.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Why do all of these new ideas for motor vehicles revolve around the government making an extra buck (or in this case pound) rather than increasing actual road safety?
Seriously! If they are going to ticket everyone doing 5 over, why not the people traveling at half the limit in the middle lane?
They could tell that it isn't traffic by looking at the cars around them and checking their speed. If they (the other cars) are going alot faster, ticket the person.
Because removing the faster drivers (insanely and otherwise) does little when you still have the insanely slow drivers.
True. But I hope the other media don't repeat this story too loudly, otherwise the nanny-state mentality prevalent here in Australia will get wind of the idea ant take it up with glee.
GPS fears are paranoia. If you're really afraid that the government is out to get you, you'd better avoid cell-phones entirely. You're walking around with a fairly powerful radio transmitter. There are companies which sell software that triangulate the position of a cell-phone based on the surrounding cell towers. GPS doesn't add any new capability in terms of tracking that they didn't have before.
If this becomes compulsory, no way I am buying a new car in Britain! I'll either go abroad, or buy second hand, or keep running my existing car. Anyway the chances of this getting through parliament are between slim and none. Even if it did, the other political parties will have a field day and use revocation of the requirement in order to guarantee themselves an election victory next time.
... hop in a boat, sail across the ocean, and declare their independence?
I thought I heard that story once. Maybe today's Brits need to do the same thing, only in reverse -- put their lawmakers on a boat and give 'em the old heave-ho.
----
That said, you know, I'd *really* like to disable the air bag's "black box" in my own car. Anyone know how to take one of these out of a Pontiac?
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
This could actually be something useful. Nobody likes fines, but no one likes reckless drivers either. If more flexible and adaptable driving laws were put into place, this could allow for higher speed limits when and where it would be safe, plus it would guarantee equality in fines (with maybe a bias toward middle/upper class if this was only put into new cars). If done with the SAFETY of people in mind, not revenue, it would allow for higher speed limits, and maybe some other features (i.e. the speed limit is 80, but there would be an audio warning and you had 30 seconds to get back down to give you time to pass) If the government still plans to pull the same amount of revenue from traffic violations, this would allow them to do it fairly, and with smaller more frequent fines.
The laws need to be REPEALED. 'Flexible' laws are laws that are flexibly enforced. Flexible enforcement is another term for persecution.
You pass a lot of laws and then you enforce those laws against "them". "They" are whatever group of people needs to be controlled, minimalized, or put down. In the USA, some of these groups are blacks, homosexuals, and conservative Republicans.
The correct answer is to repeal the laws and replace them with "guidelines". If most traffic laws were repealed, would you start intentionally hitting other cars or pedestrians? I wouldn't.
If my car told someone I was bad at keeping within the "guidelines" and I got a letter saying "Please do a better job!", would that be a threat? No.
Freedom is the only correct answer to most of these questions.
But flexibility breeds corruption. The proliferation of rarely-enforced laws leads to a situation where most citizens are unwittingly breaking some minor law all the time. This allows police too much discression to detain people whenever they want. It would be much better if all laws were ridgedly enforced -- public pressure would then ensure that we only get reasonable laws. Flexible laws give power to the enforcers. Ridgid laws give power to the people.
For anyone who doesn't know, The Sun's quality of journalism ranks at the heady heights found slighty above that of The National Enquirer in the USA.
So it's probably only a plan to monitor CO2 emmisions or something like that...
If it was true, there are, of course, some blatantly obvious questions:
- How do they know exactly WHO was driving at the time of the incident? (and how could they prove it?)
- How would it know the bounds of a bus lane (expensive infrastructure change to put any technology in the bus lanes)?
- If they're worried about speeding, why not regulate the vehicle to the posted speed limit?
- Wouldn't that be discriminatory? Because people bringing their vehicles from abroad wouldn't have those sensors?
EOM
"Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach him how to fish and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day."
This sig is in Spanish when you're not looking....
Piss him off!
1. Steal his car one night
2. Drive around like a madman for 30 minutes
3. Park it back in his driveway
4. Watch the hijinks ensue when the police cart him away.
Be sure to wear gloves and leave no DNA. He'll never be able to prove it wasn't him.
I have a friend that is finishing up his law enforcement degree, and I have family that are police officers.
:P
You know what? They don't want to have to work any harder than they have to, just like the rest of us, and they certainly don't like to 'work in vain'. That is, give a citation, or make an arrest, just to see it not hold up in court because they had some detail out of line.
How would you like spending weeks shoring up and securing a server, only to see a hacker get in because you overlooked a minor, but very obvious detail?
A cop giving you a citation for 1 mile over would be doing more or less that. It's wasting their time and yours. I've been told time and again that 'quotas don't exist', but raises and promotions are based on busts and citations. Sure, there may not be a quota, but you'd best believe there is motivation to place as many arrests and citations as possible, but you also want them to stand up in court if it ever goes there.
Okay, enough rambling.
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Err, no. It's not 'nonsense' to suggest what the parent poster did, it's accurate as it's exactly what they've been doing for the last several years and is by and large entirely what they are continuing to do.
Even Conservatives are not behind the Tory party right now.
Your 100% crackers if you think The Sun are behind the every more right leaning Tory party. The Sun may be right wing, but then so are New Labour.
I'd also add that The Sun's 'traditional' position is simply whatever one Newscorp tells them to take.
This is not the first time I've seen this proposal and this has very little to do with getting terrorists or criminals.
As a UK motorist I've watched the plague of speed cameras spring to life all over the place. Off course not in front of schools or in areas where there is a high accident rate. But in places where there is a high volume of traffic where the speed limit doesn't reflect the conditions of the road.
(Namely where people have tendancy to drift above 30mph on long dual carriage way stretch).
There is now twice as many traffic wardens patrolling my streets as there are policemen. Watching the traffic wardens they each have there regular spots that they like to check, usually a quiet lane with a faded double yellow line, where common scenes tells the driver parking their car there will not obstruct anything. Within 5 minutes of parking there the car will be clamped or taken away.
At the sametime the places where it is critical to the road clear to let the traffic are not patrolled.
These measures introduced by the goverment are nothing short of being a cash cow.
I pay about 150 in road tax and 90% of the money I spend on fuel is tax. At the sametime the rail infrastructure is crumbling, the public transport system is nothing but shocking. The roads are badly mantained and any plans for improvement are tied down in burcratic red tape.
Also the real criminal element comes from car thieves or joyriders. And usually all they get a slap on the wrist because they are under 16 and can't be punished by judicail system.
Now I would describe myself as an average driver. I occationly let the speed counter slip above the speed limit. I have sometimes not got my road tax within the deadline. There are the human occational mistakes.
Now my goverment want to install their personal spy into my car. Off course this is the same goverment who purposed that the food-standard agency should have access to all my communications, details, email and web habits. This is nothing to do with safety. This is everything to do with raising money for an ever more brueacratic system that fails to deliver.
This is also about intruding on my freedom of movement and stamping upon my honour as law abiding citizen.
Well if they introduce such devices I will be hacking these devcies and I will break them and bend them to my will. I will also gladly goto jail over it because this to me this is type of thing that has to be done to protect my freedom.
In The Netherlands, speed limits were raised a few years ago. The reason? Almost everybody ignored them, and also ignored the fines flowing into their mailbox.
The justice system got clogged trying to give everyone some eyeball time with a judge. The obvious solution to this backend bottleneck was, to reconfigure the frontend -- set the speed limit high enough to reduce the flood of speeding tickets.
There's a new approach being introduced here in Austria. On the A22 in Vienna, which is a three-lane highway, there is a speed restriction of 80 km/h (50 mph) within the city limits. This is enforced using cameras at various locations, which take images on the number plates of the cars, then compare the time taken to traverse a specific distance. If your average speed over that period exceeds 85 km/h, you get a ticket.
Paul Gillingwater
MBA, CISSP, CISM
No offence, but comming from England myself, you have to understand a little about our culture, we dont sue, wont dont goto court, we handle things a little differently.
Like when the fuel crisis happened a few years back, a bunch of farmers and other blokes got together, and barricaded all the fuel depo's
So you can guess wot will happen, lets just say that traffic cones go missing all the time, and land up in fields, in peoples lawns etc..
The Michigan NMA did it, and I believe there was one on the Washington D.C. Beltway...
They simply organized a group of drivers to 'convoy' together and maintain the exact speed limit (55MPH). This unsurprisingly caused major havoc for the short period of time it was demonstrated. Also, I've seen stories on usenet, etc. of angry drivers trying to prove a point after getting a few tickets by doing the speed limit in residential areas (25MPH often) in which they were pulled over for impeding traffic by going exactly the limit.
Perhaps if the UK institutes (or considers instituting) this hair-brained scheme, a demonstration would be in order. Hell, London traffic is famously horrid - imagine a Beowulf Cluster of slow drivers !!!
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
who cares,
http://www.page3.com
Please be windows, please be windows... Can anyone say buffer overflow exploit?
Then when cop pulls me over. Officer, I couldn't have been speeding, just check the moniter. I'm sure it will say I was obeying all trafic laws.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
1) increased traffic problems as people drive under the limit - to prevent accidental speeding.
2) speeding changed to "fines only" since everyone would lose their license under a U.S. style point system.
3) The rich will speed anyway because they can afford to.
I hope this is unconstitutional in the US based on the 5th ammendment which protects against self incrimination.
Hanging around "the wrong people"???
please clarify, and tell me how hanging around the wrong people should land you in prison for as long as it pleases the government. Ass.
I, for one, welcome our new freshly-thawed nerd overlords!
Seems rather backwards to go to the trouble of all this sensor/ID crap in order to get people to drive slower -- why not just stop manufacturing cars that go FASTER THAN THE SPEED LIMIT!
I don't agree with the ideas behind these potential laws mind you...However I have always wondered why we manufacture cars that can go over the maximum speed limit -- where can you drive over 75MPH (besides the autobahn, and besides, what justification is that for other countries?) legally?
We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
You mean you don't already have one!!!
"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." -- Ayn Rand
You're new over here aren't you.
There's only one thing that I like about that paper... well 2 things actually... and the authenticity of those is dubious...
You fool! You've given cheese to a lactose intolerant volcano god! Do you know what that means?
AH, but they Government have already said it wouldn't stop Asylum seekers (though they keep flipping back to it, because they have so few reasons why it would be a good idea to impliment ID cards).
All legal citizens in the UK have National Insurance cards (like US Social Security cards), which have a unique key on the front. You could simply send that key into a central database which keeps your details on file. Which is what the smart cards are going to do anyway (it's not as if the cards are going to contain all of your actual medical history, just a pointer to it so a computer can retrieve it from a central database).
That makes NEW ID CARDS POINTLESS! We already have compulsory unique identifing 'serial numbers'! Only a fuckwit of the higest order could fail to think that ID cards would be 'more useful' in stoping bogus asylum seekers!
ID cards would add no new meaningful functionality and would cost us millions.
If they introduce an smart card that you can use in place of cash payments, allows you to access your medical data, your empolyment history, your front door key, your work pass then I'm interested, as it is, it's just a pointless exercise.
The ONLY, ONLY useful thing it provides is a handy form of Photo ID for those who don't have a passport or driving license. Big deal. Not orth several million pounds of tax payers money by any streach of the imagination.
The US now uses it's Social Security card as an effective 'national ID card', there is no reason why we couldn't do the same gradually over time, just make them in to smart cards for new recipients (and possibly those that request them) so you can ultimately do cryptographic authentication with them for say permitting access to medical or empoyment data (not that the government will have their heads screwed on enough for this, the UK government AWLAYS award contracts to the lease competent bidder as far as IT contracts are go, though the Open.gov.uk web site approach seems to have gone reasonably well...).
Hey now, that's Imperial Beach, not San Diego-- the cops down there are definitly more Roscoe P. Coltrane than in San Diego. If you don't look local, they'll pull you over (if you're driving a car that uses unleaded gas and/or has its original paint job, you're not a local). Or were you pulled over by the MPs at the radio station? Either way, every time I go down the strand I see a ton of cops. Not a good place to speed. And don't even get me started about the idiots on Coronodo ;>
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
Well if it's in the Sun it must be true! What's it going to be next? Weekly World News articles getting discussed on Slashdot? Gimme a break!
For the benefit of US viewers, the Sun is one of those British tabloid newspapers that propogates myths about the European Union and is fascinated by the footballer David Beckham who displaces proper news on its front page on a regular basis.
The reporting is less sensational. You may object to the Times on the grounds of it being Murdoch owned, but the reporting is pretty good.
The UK people are being victimised, criminalised by virtue of a law and politiciastion of the roads that SHOULD be beyond comprehension and population acceptance.
By taking ownership of a car in the UK you are turning yourself into a criminal. Not through choice either.
What is occurring is just the tip of the iceberg, there is plenty more to come.
First though, some small pointers.
Speed kills. Erm, no. Speed(ing) in some situations kills. There is a subtle difference.
Respect for the Law. Forget it. You cannot gain respect by turning EVERYONE into a criminal. Adding a complete blanket ban on vehicle speed that is too low in too many areas simply turns everyone into a speeder. As its been said elsewhere in the comments, everyone does 35 in a 30, 45 in a 40, and so on.
I am fortunate that I grew up in the Isle of Man. What is so special about the Isle of Man one might ask? Ok, I will answer, the Island is famous for only having speeding limits in some areas (in town, round a school, so on and so forth) but in the more open road areas there is no speed limit.
One might think this is a recipe for catastrophic traffic accidents. It can be, on occasion. However, its very rare people speed in the town and built up areas. One of the reasons why is that when you leave the area, you are able to proceed to where you are going at reasonable speed. I used to travel to work going through 4 towns and I had no problem following speed limits in the areas where they existed because they are reasonable. Its logical and sensible to abide by limits which are fair and have a reason.
Nothing explains the current behaviour of police and government when it comes to the roads in the UK. There is no rhymn or reason for many of the criminalisation acts that are being put in place. There is not even a reason to put half the speed camera's were they are being cited. Many of the actual speed limits are in place where they have been ratched so far down that the road no longer serves its proper purpose or use.
In addition, the taxation element of the enforcement is clear to anyone that has sense. Its being made and put in place to persecute people and force additional tax collections and further beaurocratic governance. Unfair in all aspects.
If anyone was sane at the department of transport, they might consider having different licenses for higher speed vehicles, with different tests for the applicants. Someone who intends to drive a high speed vehicle should be able to handle it properly.
There should be higher speed limits on motorways and on many dual carriageways, and on many roads where there is no reason to have this heavyhanded limitation in place. During bad weather or for other reasons there is no reason why this could not be amended to suit.
I have no objection to having tight limits round schools or other areas. Thats totally acceptable. Its logical. But many of the things being done today on UK roads are not. The assumtion is being made that no one is capable of driving above 60 miles per hour apart from motorways.
Sorry, but I for one am capable of driving beyond 60-70 miles per hour. Based on road conditions and on traffic there is no reason why the population should not be allowed to drive at sensible speeds rather than snail paced crawling.
Add in that many roads are being artifically 'jammed' by totally inappropriate behaviour from the government just adds to the misery. Care to discuss the accidents and social consequences of road rage related to these various issues? Perhaps consider the irrational behaviour of some individuals when you imprison them in a prison of a different kind without trial, reason, or justice and consider the impact. The social impacts of the monsters this breeds and the accidents related to it are generally unknown. Many of the traffic lights in London are being held on Red for inappropriate lengths of time. Little is said of such road piracy.
Let me put this another way. The entire system
We`re all equal
...sounds more like The Daily Sport, along with stories like 'Condoms grow on trees' and 'Double Decker bus found on the moon'... plus their infamous Versace murder headline of "Shoots You Sir" (an understanding of the comedy show "The Fast Show" is needed there).
Ahh what lovely gutter media we have in the UK.
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Why bother sending drivers tickets at all? Surely it would be simpler to require drivers to provide a bank account number that can be automatically debited anytime you exceed the speed limit, enter a bus lane during its hours of operation {because, after all, it's perfectly OK to drive in a bus lane when there are no buses scheduled} or whatever. No need for police officers, traffic wardens or courts or any of that nonsense. Let the computers do all the work for you! Meanwhile, coppers get freed up to bust people for "suspicious behaviour" {translation: being a pedestrian}. In fact, why don't we just routinely take a sample of everybody's DNA at birth, so we don't need to trawl around pulling suspects in? If you've done nothing wrong you should be proud to show it! Your DNA sample is there not because we don't trust you, but because we do trust you, and you want to show us how good you are!
..... but as long as there are organs of disinformation like The Sun, idiots will believe everything they are told.
..... In theory, if someone stood for election promising cheaper petrol, higher speed limits outside of built-up areas and no more road tax, they would be in before you could say "landslide victory". The only mystery is why they haven't!
..... in which case we could well be headed for Interesting Times Indeed.
I have to say I don't think this would happen in any other European country. Mainlanders just wouldn't stand for this kind of interference. Go to France or Spain and whereever you see a "defense de fumer" or "prohibido fumar" sign, there will be a cendrier or a cenicero nearby; and probably full to overflowing at that. We just aren't used to being told what to do; an Englishperson's business is nobody else's but their own. It comes as so much of a shock when someone tries to meddle in our business, that we react as conditioned: assume that the meddling is in order {because we can only assume that they, like us, must have been brought up to respect Other People's Business; if such meddling were at all suspect, they surely would not attempt it}, being done for a perfectly good reason {an Englishperson never does anything without a perfectly good reason, though said reason be their business and nobody else's} and therefore accept it.
Of course, this is The Sun we're talking about - for Readers in Less Civilised Nations, The Sun is low-grade reading matter for an immature, sexist, homophobic readership who almost take a pride in their own uselessness - and the article is more likely just a way to whip up readers into a hate frenzy.
What does amaze me is that there isn't an organisation dedicated to defending the rights of the motorist in Britain. We pootle about in little runabouts with 1600cc or smaller engines driving the front wheels via a 5-on-the-floor manual transmission {all good for fuel economy. Note: when comparing, remember a full UK gallon is equal to 1.25 US gallons -- seems like someone on board the Mayflower forgot there are 20 fluid ounces in a pint, not 16. Or just do it in litres and kilometres like every other country}, and are made to feel guilty for this while Other People are driving cars with considerably worse fuel economy. Yet they try to make us feel guilty about the drop in the ocean we are producing! Particularly as we could be using climate-change-free, non-fossil fuels like chip fat
The time has passed when the motorist was in the minority. Today, non-motorists {me included!} are the minority. Yet the law has not come to reflect this reality; presumably because someone is getting fat off it
Still, perhaps this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Or maybe it won't
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I bet it will be based on some sort of encryption and will need a CPU to work.
;-)
This means someone will reverse engineer it, build a modchip or find a buffer overflow and suddenly all speeding tickets will be mailed to 10, Downing Street
RedShirt
Microsft spel chekar vor sail, worgs grate !!!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Just to bring it to peoples' attention, something in excess of 3,000 people are KILLED every year by cars and trucks in the UK... and yet the UK is considered to have a "good" road safety record. That figure is in the region of a hundred times worse per passenger mile than the rail or bus system, the equivalent of a fully-loaded 767 going down every single month.
/.-friendly note, this type of infrastructure is PERFECT to pave the way for robot-driven self-navigating cars and autonomous road vehicles.
Hence, I'm in favour of virtually ANY regulation of motorists. Nobody has a god-given right to carry themselves about in two tons of steel - especially in a small and crowded country like the UK with an adequate public transport infrastructure.
As to "driving at 35 when the limit is 30"... in any case, either of those speeds is too fast on urban UK roads. We have a much higher level of pedestrian (and cyclist) activity than the US, especially in towns. There's also a massive problem with illegaly-owned, uninsured cars and people driving them without the proper license.
Anyways, to finish on a more
Great Idea!!!
But I think there is something important missing out there: the government vehicles (like Prime Minister's Jaguar) should also have those spies installed.
You can defy gravity... for a short time
Maybe /. should try theming with the Simpsons as well...
Get used to stuff like this, when petrol is scarce you will give up any civil liberty to retain your "freedom" and "right" to personal transport. Something I believe Americans hold to be sacrosanct. Additionally this will be a largely irrelevant kind of debate when bugs are powered by your body temperature and are more plentiful than dust. If the government (or any collection of concepts with sufficient economic or social power) chose to monitor you - they will. This is almost the case at the moment. It will become easier as time goes by. I am soooooooo upset.
We have sign posts they could send a wireless signal to the car engine. This signal could in turn control a governer on the car. When you're in a 55MPH zone the signs would send out a 55MPH signal. You wouldn't be allowed to go any faster. When you're in a 30MPH zone the signs would send out a 30MPH signal and the car would be goverened to that as a max speed.
Only downfall -- government can't use speed laws to increase revenue streams.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Will it work technologically? I don't know.
Having data and using data are two different things.
Having data is good. What you do with it, how you penalize people, how much slack you allow on different violations, that's a judgement call.
If you consider yourself any kind of scientist, you have to support data collection - the alternative is to be blind to reality.
I love driving but cars and roads are literally destroying the planet anyway... the legal regime in which these machines of destruction are operated can hardly be too tight.
I haven't read all 400+ comments on this topic or done any research into the U.S.'s OBD-III stuff, but how are they going to handle the practical side of this, e.g., the fact that I'm an identical triplet and sometimes loan my cars or pickup truck to one of my brothers. If one of them is driving and goes 60mph in a 45 zone, who gets the ticket? Lets see that one stand up in court.
Yet another advantage to having a multiple!
Twin or more? ITA
Apache/Spring/La
It's about time that we used technology to reduce the amount of bad drivers out there...it would also force car manufacturers to change the advertising for cars (no more fast/dangerous driving by "cool" owners), it would save humanity lives, gross use of gas, promote indirectly more efficent, practical, (read: slower vehicles)...an end to the fast car culture (at least in street use, sure go ahead, race on tracks instead.). It would also promote better driving habits...a real plus...too bad it would take a long time to implement here in north america...
most of those havent bee around since 20's vintage cars
My first car was a '73 International Harvester Scout, and it had a choke. Not that I ever used it, but it was there on the dash, right next to the cigarette lighter.
-72
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
the time lag between this orwellian nightmare being deployed and the existence of blackmarket 'blinding' modifications that sever the spybot's connections to its sensors in an undetectable (to the spybot) way will be what? a week? a month?
I think it will be great when people start making mod chips to alter the data sent, it would be so much fun to make it look like your friend(or enemy) is driving like 150MPH when they are really going like 20MPH, make it look like they are driving on sidewalks, and over bus stops, ahh what fun they will have overseas.
However, the same story was in The Sunday Times.
Oh right, it was CmdrTaco of course...
Here is a link to the Sunday Times which confirms this information, include government confirmation. The Times is probably the most non-tabloid newpaper in the UK! http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-79051 2,00.html
I had forgotten all about those until I got on the Sun's webpage! Now there is a newspaper.
Hit the goto drop down on the left hand side column and look for Page 3.
Yes! I am trolling!
-------------------------
As easy as herding cats!
... maybe going out and voting for who they think represents their views? Now there's a revolutionary concept! Power to the people!
- Chris
If the sensors are *that* good, then why don't they make automated cars and make the whole problem go away?
The story sounds like it contains a large dollop of bull...
In the UK the current government propaganda is that speeding is a contributing factor in one third of all accidents which other than the fact that speed is a contributing factor in all accidents is patently bullshit.
Even the police recognise that speeding contributes to a tiny fraction, some 7% of accidents, the overwhelming factors being bad driving; Poor observation, poor judgement, thoughtlessness and inattention.
http://www.ringroad.org.uk/one_third.htm
Why is speeding demonised in this way? It's easy and politicians are lazy. Simple to measure and it allows the automated collection of millions of pounds of fines every year.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
They expect us to make a big noise about these black boxes because it is such a nutty idea. But the big noise will take the heat away from something else, perhaps their proposed ID chips in numberplates.
The day they bring this in is the day I emigrate to Canada. But somehow I dont think I'll have to be packing my bags because no govenment, not even this one is so out of touch as to commit electoral suicide in this way.
Oxford Dictionaries Online
What about swerving? Nope, it's not an anti-swerving device either. What about tired drivers? Distracted drivers (we all know how bad eating, shaving, and reading the paper while driving are--not to mention cell phones).
Is it also going to come with a breathalyzer too?
This is a bullshit device (read: revenue generating), and I'm hoping the UK folks get really pissed about this and do something.
The OBD-III scares the living shit out of me, especially if we have another 4 years of monkey boy and his oilly staff in the US.
OBD-III link:
http://asashop.org/autoinc/may/obd_iii_new.cfm
And the link is on slashdot, the site that brought you countless dupes and hoaxes. And unbiased reporting on Microsoft and Linux. And such high, high journalistic standards. I would say the link is in the right place.
The Sun newspaper is notorious for printing stories that have little or no basis in truth. It's also written in a style geared towards readers with a mental age of 12.
Warning! Potential Adult Content in the thread's original post!
-------------------------
As easy as herding cats!
Folks, this *is* the Sun we are talking about here, which is a very, shall we say, Sensation-oriented paper. So take it all with a grain of salt.
***But*** there are good reasons you should welcome this tech, if it should ever come to pass. One is, it's a step toward true metered insurance. If everything is recorded, we can dispense with this nonsense about traffic fines and just charge you a different insurance rate based on how safely you really drive. Good driving behavior could be rewarded, bad could be punished. Now if you are an unsafe driver, you won't like this because it you will have to change your driving habits. But good drivers everywhere will rejoice at the safer roads.
Once metered insurance is in place, we can have cars that drive themselves, with insurance based on how safe the car drives. We can't have them now due to liability issues and potential for greatly increased traffic.
Ok, so buy one overseas or keep your existing car. You still have to get the device installed. RTFA.
If this ever came into action it would be hacked faster than onDigital was.
There are always 3 things involved with any good system of rules:
1. A set of rules.
2. Circumstances where the rules shouldn't apply.
3. A person or persons in charge of enforcing the
rules that understand both 1 and 2.
set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
They're great, but they do require that almost everyone knows how to use them. In England, we have them all over the place, and succesfully negotiating one is part of the driving test, so they work perfectly well. Visitors may find them slightly intimidating, but they can follow the lead of all the other drivers.
Presumably, in New Jersey, most drivers had never seen one before, and weren't quite sure how to use one. I guess they just can't be retrofitted to an existing road network.
hahah. thought that was appropriate, even if it is lame.
Between this news post and the OBD-III....can you say 1984?
Why not spend this money on tackling the real fucking crime in this country. Instead of snapping people who occasionally break the speed limit, why the hell can't they help us track down the thieving pieces of scum who actually steal our cars.. or spend money on increasing the police force which will result in:
a) Increased amount of traffic police which will help have some impact on both these kind of 'minor' speeding offences, and other traffic violations.
b) Reduce street crime if there are more general 'on the beat' type police.
c) Improve the facilities available to an already stretched system.
I don't get it.. this government is always trying to find ways to fuck over the guys who actually pay their road taxes or pay their bills.. is it because we are an easier target? Why can't you spend the money on the things this country REALLY NEEDS instead of scams for the average guy.
I'd even understand it if they spend the money on linking up the insurance / tax / mot / driving license systems so that we can help cut down on the bastards driving without insurance, that puts the cost up for the honest people like myself.
My god, it enrages me so much. I can't wait to vote Labour out of government at the next election.. Blair and his crue have managed to fuck this country right up the arse since they took over and even for someone like myself who pays very little attention to politics, its frustrating to watch this country go to shit.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
guess the police got no excuse to pull people over and violate their privacy by searching their cars anymore.
It's a PERFECT /. story! :)
Laugh, it's true!
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
Then sign me up. Such potentially 1984-like tools won't be forced upon us. Instead, we'll welcome them as ways to save money.
to err is human, to forgive is divine, to forget is... umm...
once again..a 5 day old story.
I've often said that there were definite technology solutions to the problem of highway safety, but it depends on the goals of the citizenry and the government.
Take speeding, for example. If your goal is to make sure nobody goes over the posted speed limit, then what we have now is not a very effective solution -- wherein people drive however they want to until they see a cop. Most times you can see him in enough time to slow down, but even if you're still going to fast, so is everyone else, and he's obviously looking for the REALLY fast drivers. Oh, and the most important part... once everybody passes the cop, they speed up again.
So, are the roads safer in this situation? I don't think so. You have a quarter mile stretch where people drive the speed limit, and they drive faster than the limit elsewhere on the road.
But maybe the goal isn't highway safety. Maybe it's revenue from tickets. Nothing wrong with that... it's a pefectly legitimate form of revenue for a local government. If you have an automated system in place that tracks all speeders and gives them tickets every single time they speed, speeding will come to an end. Eventually the government's safety program is so effective that nobody speeds and the highways become dramatically safer (most accidents are a result of excessive speed). Then ticket revenue slows to a crawl. Like I said, it depends on your goals.
It's very much like the additional money that is added to the price of a pack of cigarettes in the US, due to the lawsuits against the tobacco companies by various state governments. This money is given to the states, and the states are growing accustomed to having this money for their various programs. But this revenue is based on sales of cigarettes. So does the government have a vested interest in helping people quit? Probably not.
I drive fast... to be sure. The faster you go, the sooner you get there. I feel like I'm a "safe driver". Incidentally, have you heard that most people feel like they're better drivers than most people? The idea of actually having to drive 55 or 65 mph, or slower in many cases, isn't a great thrill to me... but it has become obvious in recent years that we're approaching the problem of speeding in the wrong way. If your objective is REALLY to keep traffic under the speed limit, technology is the way to do it.
RP
You sir, are full of shit and know nothing of what you speak.
A stuck fuel injector will dump a TON of fuel into one cylinder(unless you have throttle-body injection, in which case, all cylinders); the super-rich mixture(throttle hasn't opened proportionately) won't ignite(or if it does, it'll burn so slowly+poorly it won't provide any power), and you'll actually loose an entire cylinder's worth of power. On a TBI car, if all the injectors stuck(even with TBI there are usually multiple injectors), the engine would die on the spot.
A friend's practically-brand-new Corvette had an entire bank(ie, one half of the V8) of injectors short to ground(many injectors are switched ground-side, not supply-side) and the car ran like complete crap, threw numerous error codes, etc.
The FEW out-of-control situations are either caused by stuck throttle linkages or drivers hitting the wrong pedal. Both problems are solved by simply SWITCHING THE FUCKING IGNITION OFF in all cases save diesels(early Rabbit diesels would sometimes start sucking engine oil into the intake and burning it instead of the diesel fuel, resulting in a possible out-of-control situation, as diesels have no ignition system- ignition is by heat of compression). Note- if you turn the ignition off, only turn it to the accessory position, or you'll be finding it mighty hard to steer. Lastly, don't dilly-dally with the brake pedal, the vacuum(or hydraulic fluid pressure reservoir, on some cars) only has a limited capability for brake assist with the engine off.
Please help metamoderate.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Boy, what a collection of pathetic peasants.
If you had any sense, any balls, you'd be fleeing for the wide-open, high-speed spaces of America.
But no, you'll stay, following the laws blindly as your governments build the concentraton camp walls and recruit a few of you to keep the others in their places at gunpoint.
Sheep. All of you.
Did you ever stop to think that is was the Nazis who first proposed a "European Union".
There. I feel better now.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
This is a great idea!
People are complaining that it will turn everyone into a lawbreaker, but everyone already IS a lawbreaker...everyone who drives faster than the speed limit, which is to say, everyone. Drivers slow down when they see a cop in front of them and freeze up when they see a cop behind them. A cop could ticket any one of us if he chose to.
Raise the statutory speed limits to the real ones (where the cops start ticketing people), make them dynamic (reflecting weather, traffic, etc.), and then I think this scheme would be great.
I'd welcome a computer that can tell when I"m going over the line. Then it can drive for me from KS to CO and back. Thats 600 miles of strait nothing.
I do security
In the galaxy of 'A Deepness in the Sky', it is always a sign of the impending collapse of civilization when the authorities implement 'ubiquitous law enforcement'. This is when every piece of equipment and automation is essentially an agent of the state.
Time to start digging that bomb shelter...
car: you have three points left on your license
driver: yeah! yeah! I know. . I know!
The British government has had an interesting love-hate relationship with the automobile for some time now. As the number of autos grows in proportion to the population, the cities and towns become parking traps, with parking space as a premium and the watchful eye of the meter-readers making money hand-over-fist for the unfortunate who have no choice but to eat the cost of having to park -somewhere- in order to work.
In the larger towns and even some smaller ones with industry the issue has almost caused riots. For the Sun to print something like this is enough to have people up in arms who care to read the rag. I'm sure they've had a stern talking to, and I doubt the government had anything to do with putting them up to it. It's simply a sensationalist topic, prey to any fiction they bothered to spin. They could have said "mandatory install of labour party bobble-heads that measure centripetal force in turns as a means to fine you for excessive speeding" and the froth would fly. Interested parties would be advised to check the CSPAN schedule...www.cspan.org
British Newscast
BBC, Newsnight
London (United Kingdom)
ID: 177913 - 08/26/2003 - 0:50 - NS
Cheers.
Every new form of media has it's own Requirimento
just another distraction for bad drivers
I see people turning into the wrong lane quite often. It would sure be nice to see turn mistakes penalized, if only a little.
I am sick of being able to read the hood badge of the car behind me in my rear view mirror because they want me to go 20MPH over the speed limit. If people didn't drive like raving lunatics, this law would not be necessary.
I hope they bring it to the US. Laws are largely made because people don't know how to act. If people don't know how to act, the government steps in to make a law for it. All of this could be rectified and prevented if people simply drove sensibly and stopped killing each other on the roads.
Driving too fast, aggressively and not paying attention is the biggest cause of driving deaths, whether drunk or sober.
Bravo! These assholes will finally get what they deserve.
l8,
AC
'Criminals' will never get fines from this because they will simply hack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_c
None of our parties would have the guts to even propose it.
Even if a party did propose it, it would not make it through a vote in parliament.
Even if it did pass into law, the party who pushed it through would likely be voted out at the next election, and the new party would repeal it.
Even if nobody repealed it, it would probably be found unconstitutional by the courts.
Even if it were not found to be unconstitutional by the courts, enough people would challenge individual tickets in court on the grounds that they did what they did to avoid an accident that it would be found to be uneconomical, and the program would be shut down.
I feel safe from this law.
If you are wealthy, you can speed all the time.
Police here seldom pull people over, because photo-radar revenue goes directly to them.
You can avoid jail for things like theft, etc. by paying a fee.
WTF! Pay as you go crime : )
I would complain more, but I don't intend to stay poor- in fact it's criminal.
IMO penalties should be based on community service, and have no financial impact.
Traffic accidents decrease the exact amount that domestic violence issues increase because of the fighting over who got the ticket in Dad's car.
There are instances when you need to go above the speed limit, or drive eratically, to avoid accidents. Is their device going to pick up on the extraneous happenings that cause this!?
I just wonder how long (living in the UK) I can keep buying cars from before this initiative: probably for a goodly while since I prefer slightly older cars to any of the newer models! But even so...
My father once told me a story of a small town in the US who, because of budget problems, hired a firm to set up white vans to monitor speeders and to issue tickets to the owner of the plate. After a short time, people were getting annoyed for getting tickets for going just one or two miles per hour over the limit and these whtie vans began to fall subject to vandles (pun?). Finally, the town board got rid of it when the local police representitive pointed out that there is a difference between breaking the speed limit, and speeding.
You mention finishing the road system because it's a "shambles." Are you saying that'll make it safer? You mention special testing and regulation systems for heavy vehicles. (I don't understand what "compulsory" school buses would accomplish, or even what it really means.) You propose toll roads to address funding problems. Are toll roads safer? You'd like limits on diesel engines, and I can't help but agree -- London in July and August, phew. But that's more of an environmentalist suggestion, not a suggestion for the road system per se.
What does all this have to do with the original post's reasons for supporting rigid laws for motorists? Wasn't there something about the high rate of mortality being comparable to 747s crashing with alarming regularity?
I'm a (fairly) responsible, fully paid up and accountable motorist. I'm not your problem NOW, and I won't be in the future whether there's a nanny-chip or not.
People like that never hit pedestrians, then, or collide with other cars? I fit the same categories, but I was almost side swiped twice this morning during my 4-minute commute by people who don't understand the right of way at a four-way stop. Or had you considered that other people can hit you, too?
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
I forsee a large trend in buying vintage cars in the UK in the near future. Time to buy some stock in the classics.
-Valiss
Red light here in california were shutdown because they were taking pictures too early... It's all about the money folks.
Police agencies make millions off of ticket revenues and in many cases their budgets are extremely skimped by the city. I remember once where a agency needed equipment so city hall told them to go write tickets. This type of thing can only create more abuse.
On another note, if this system succeeds expect a) more taxes to pay for the system, and b) more taxes to pay for the lost ticket revenue.
This sucks ass ladies and gentlemen.
How would the car know who to fine ? Fining the title owner for every broken law assumes that the title owner is the only person driving the car.
I guess they would just have to eliminate their traffic cops, and hire more people to process traffic fine repeals.
-
Slow-reflexes detector (compare time to react to obstacle as seen by anti-collision radar with driver's reaction time) (reports to DMV)
-
Explosives detector (reports to Homeland Security).
-
Drug detector (reports to Drug Enforcement Administration)
-
Alcohol detector (reports to local PD)
-
Seat belt non-usage detector (reports to Medical Information Bureau, the insurance clearinghouse)
-
Non-payment shutoff (reports to loan company)
-
Palladium (prevents tampering)
-
Runs Windows CE.
This will, of course, be integrated with the engine control computer, so you can't rip it out and still operate the car.OK - I'll bite...
Which part of the "No Public Right of Way" on the railways lends itself to these "stats" that you produce? The lack of public actually on the railway to be maimed/killed/injured makes this "stat" a non-starter (except for the suicidal few). The "infrastructure" that you speak of is starting to show serious signs of fatigue, and this means that people stand on a railway station for longer (especially as the railways management seem to think that cancelling train services will improve the service!?!?!?!
Also, it should be pointed out that the "bus system" uses the same "3000 deaths per year" roads as the cars do.
For informational purposes only, the last 3 accidents that I have seen on the UK's road system ALL involved a bus, and the passenger who was obviously so involved in trying to catch it that they ended up under its' wheels!
I think that the system that is being proposed will be the final nail for ANY government that tries to impose it. They think that the fuel problem that happened nearly three years ago now was a problem for them, then they've not seen anything yet!!!
I'm replacing my new car with a horse.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
I don't see how they will be able to collect more in fines than they spend on spy equipment? That stuff will be tampered with pretty often, even if it is illegal to tamper with them. If you regularly break the law(like speeding),it's not that much harder of a reach for you to break other laws (especially if you feel they are unfair).
On one hand you wouldn't need traffic cops all over to monitor people the old fashioned way. But those cops really do provide more service than stamping out tickets. I believe any officer would stop in the middle of writing a speeding ticket if someone's life was in danger.
Which honestly that's not something a lot of civilians are willing to do, most of them just turn a blind eye.
Plus the police are traditionally a very important part of the community, since they interact with the community everyday. I for one would not feel safer having them replaced by a mindless computer chip.
I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of replies on how terrible and abuse cops are. How they are all pricks and how you hate them. Honestly, I never had a problem, of course I don't go around trying to push a cops buttons when he/she arrests me to see if he'll kick my ass for it. Because I already know he/she will.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Err, you do realise that the Sun is one of the UK's more disreputable tabloids. Its not as bad as, for instance, quoting the National Enquirer on the western side of the pond, but almost...
Al.The Daily ACK - Eclectic posts by yet another hacker
IN-SANE!
Talk about going back to Stalinist times...I will definitely never live or do business in the UK with those types of laws. And that's were we in the US are moving to if we let this right-winged senators/reps and administration have their way. In the UK, with all the freaking cameras they got and now they need more monitoring. And that's one of the problems with the US Patriot Act. First, one thing and then another. If you let one slide, another one will follow. And then another one and another one. (I mean Bush's presidency has been a total disaster, so I suppose there is not that much of a chance that we could semi-elect this guy one more time.) It's a simple rule of nature where in many cases plays out for the best, but not when dealing with loosing rights for the sake of covering the asses of a few over-budgetted Agencies that did not do what they were paid to do. That my friend is FBI...Fucking Bureaucratally Insane!
...drivers do.
If you live in the eastern United States, you have undoubtedly driven on a toll-financed highway (such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike) that issues a ticket when you enter the highway, and collects the ticket (and your toll) when you exit. You may have wondered whether or not the authorities ever examine those tickets, do the math, and might be inclined to write a ticket based on your elapsed time. Or perhaps you might have wondered why--as far as you know--they never seem to. If you have a toll transponder (EZPass) on your car, perhaps you've wondered the same thing: if the N.Y. Thruway knows when you paid the toll on I-87, and when you crossed the Tappan Zee Bridge, they should be able to tell that you were speeding, right?
Obviously, they can tell that your car was speeding. What they can't tell is who was driving. And since you can't ticket a car--you can only ticket the driver--you can't use toll tickets, or electronic monitors, as a basis for issuing a citation.
How do I know this? Believe it or not, a couple of years ago the Pennsylvania State Police conducted marketing focus groups about their image, etc., and sent me an invitation. On a lark, I went--and after sitting through the usual ignore-all-those-people-behind-the-mirror discussion, we had a pretty frank Q&A session with a couple of state troopers. And when the question "do you ever compare times on the toll tickets?" came up, both cops grinned broadly. Apparently it is about the most-frequently asked of their FAQs. And, they explained, the answer is 'no.'
But then the explanation got interesting
But then one of the cops raised his eyebrows, and said, "on the other hand, the Turnpike Commission doesn't like to advertise that. Because a lot of people believe that they will get ticketed, so they stop for a meal at a rest area along the turnpike to make sure they don't arrive at the exit too soon--which means a lot of money for the turnpike."
Electronic monitoring of cars
First, there's a simple legal problem. Second, there's an enormous manufacturing/distribution problem (how do you produce all those transponders, and install them--with correct information--in every car?). Third, there's a corollary engineering problem (sensors along each lane of every road? Good luck). Fourth, there's a colossal database problem: speed limits and road striping change all the time. I've worked with the major geodata sets available for North America, and none of them even include fields for speed limit, because the data changes so often that it is pointless to try to maintain it on even a 3-month update cycle.
In short, this is nonsense.
LOL. I wouldn't wipe my rear with that hate rag, much less quote it for scientific or technology news.
Public right of way or no, the railway does a (mostly) adequate job of getting people from A to B without killing anyone in the process. I'm inclined to think that "general public" and "speeds in excess of 25mph" do not mix all that well in areas where transport by a trained, responsible operator (heck, even a robot) is a viable alternative.
So without this European connection I can not believe the story to be true
The Sun IS a Filthy Rag (TM).
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
How long until they start selling mod chips for these reporting devices, or better yet, for whole cars?
Someone should start a pool for the first time someone posts pics of them booting linux on their Honda. It won't be long now, especially with those pretty lcd screens they have in those hybrids.
Note also that (in Florida, at least) if you are given a speeding ticket by a police officer in "moving mode" (his vehicle is moving when he tags you with the radar gun) the speedometer of the police cruiser must have been calibrated within the 6 months before you were issued the ticket. If you contest the ticket in court, the officer should supply the calibration paperwork at the hearing. If this is not supplied, the judge should dismiss the ticket before you even say anything beyond "I'm here."
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
It's called guilt by association, fucktard. And notice the word "multiple" in bold.
Stupid git.
While i don't have a hard time imagining that something like this is coming in the near future, let us consider the source, the Sun is not exactly the most reputable news source, more likely it hangs out somewhere near the bottom end of the reputability scale. Why not post some stuff from the weekly world news while we are at it? They had some great articles on UFO technology last week.
On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
Just to bring it to peoples' attention, something in excess of 3,000 people are KILLED every year by cars and trucks in the UK... and yet the UK is considered to have a "good" road safety record. That figure is in the region of a hundred times worse per passenger mile than the rail or bus system, the equivalent of a fully-loaded 767 going down every single month.
Just you hold on right there! What class of fully-loaded 767?
Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
Ever since OBD-II diagnostics became standard, folks have been bypassing the emissions portion of the system. If you do a quick web search - you'll find a number of people selling little boxes to splice in to your car's wiring harness, so it generates the proper voltage pulses to trick the computer into thinking the catalytic converter is fully functional. (That way, folks can remove the restriction of said converter and get better performance out of their vehicle, without tripping "check engine" lights all the time.)
.... but it's also commonplace, and 99% of the time, those federally mandated testing stations will never notice one is installed. (Their test equipment plugs into the OBD-II diagnostics port and if everything seems normal on that end, you're ok by them.)
Yeah, it's illegal
OBD-II does much more than check for emissions compliance, though. It's generally considered a good system, and an improvement over the original OBD-I computers. You can get a lot of cool information from OBD-II by attaching a laptop (or Palm) to one with the right cable + software, such as your engine temps. and timing, RPMs, etc.
OBD-III was probably supposed to be a technically superior OBD-II until the EPA got ahold of the specs and started trying to slip in more emissions control B.S.
...the year was divided into, say, 12 monitoring periods and if absolutely no offences were committed during a period (not even 1 mile per hour over a limit), the driver was awarded a bonus payment of, say 50 uk pounds. ..er..actually, no, the whole idea of the system is totally cack in the first place. Forget it.
AT&ROFLMAO
One - What about overtaking on a two-lane highway? You sure as shit don't want to be in the oncoming lane any longer than possible. It would in fact probably be illegal (dangerous driving) if you pulled out to pass a guy doing 80 in a 90, and only did so at 82. It's stupid and dangerous and wrong. In at least one case, the limit is not absolute.
/.), after all.
Two - Alberta, for one, has 110 km/h posted highways. Why should I have to get my governor adjusted just to drive somewhere else in the SAME COUNTRY.
Three - there's many cars out there that DO have governors, they're just at 160 or 170 or so.
Four - I've been to drag strips in Quebec where people take their street cars to race. This would burden people doing something legal unnecessarily.
Five - the safety reasons brought up by others. You never know when you're going to need to avoid something to safe your life. And any emergency shut-off system could easily be exploited.
Also, there's lots of things that you can be sold (guns, knives, noxious chemicals) that could be used to break the law, but as the title suggest, there ARE non-infringing uses for going over 100 km/h, and so the car should not be crippled. This is libertarian city (a.k.a.
Basically, stop breaking the damn law yourself, or go back to kindergarten! No one's holding your hand to make sure you don't assault someone with it. Hell, you can break the speed limit coasting your bicycle down a hill sometimes, that doesn't mean all bikes should have auto-engage breaks. You just need to not be an idiot and use them yourself.
I have seen a lot of people who jaywalk, or hop off curbs with bicycles in the middle of the street, or ride their bicycles through a pedestrian crosswalk expecting people to stop. They're not allowed to carry liability insurance. If someone jaywalks and I hit them, and they damage my car, I *HAVE* to sue them. There is no recourse with their insurance agency since they aren't required to carry public liability insurance. The same thing goes for bicycles. I agree that many drivers are inconsiderate towards pedestrians and cyclists, but if you want it to work one way, it has to work both ways.
Oh, and if you want drivers to carry these tracking devices around, how about equipping every bicycle and human being with them? Wait a minute, they should just rename the UK into Oceania and put up pictures of Big Brother to go along with all the cameras monitoring everyone. Don't expect me to throw a rope to you now that you're sliding down that slippery slope.
>blic right of way or no, the railway does a (mostly) adequate job of getting people from A to B without killing anyone in the process.
Assuming "A" and "B" are city centres or the few areas conveniently close to a railway station. And even if they are, it's unlikely that a single train will go to both A and B. Only a very small fraction of my family's regular journeys can be reasonably achieved by public transport - not everyone lives in London. For what it's worth, I'd agree that cars in London are a nuisance.
The zeal with which some people will support such obnoxious, invasive schemes because they dislike the group targeted is truly depressing. Usually the target is illegal immigrants (ID cards and the like). Of course, motorists are a rather large group and I hope it's going to be more difficult getting this one through.
We can't go down to Old Trafford because Big Brother is watching everything I do, comrades.
No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
Oregon State is considering this as well but just for mileage. Due to the increased efficiency in hybrids etc. the state needs to make up for lost revenue from gas taxes. One idea was to GPS and give a per mile tax on road use. I think it should be a weight mile tax to stick it to the heavy SUV's and I think it should double if you use spiked tire but I digress. Nothing like seeing some dumbass soccer mom in a Mercedes SUV drive down wet pavement in April and slide and extra foot when she slams on the breaks.
For the aim that this seem to be targeting (that humans are TERRIBLE drivers for the most part.) I think a better idea would be to get rid of the driver. Mercedes has had cars that can drive themselves for years. Make cars a peer to peer network based on GPS end points and simple rules. If I could read a book, watch TV, have sex etc. while driving. The fact that I can't speed and more would be more than made up for by getting a hummer while I pass men with small penises in their large gas guzzling cars.
Rise Robot Rise!
Typo?
Orwell must be turning in his grave,
with a camera watching just to be sure he's "in line" with the party.
The reason they haven't done this is that the imposition of a frequent, hard, driving test would be more expensive, harder to implement and politically far more unpopular than more automatic monitoring.
Therefore, it ain't going to happen.
The spy-in-the-car will either fall at the first hurdle or people will just accept it.
Tom
Boiled frog anyone?
And this is one of the problems - people have opinions about what is right; this is one reason we have laws, to enforce an agreed concensus.
High speeds on country lanes in the dark can be extremely dangerous. I grew up in a rural area of Britain, and you often end up walking or cycling back along such roads at night (especially when you're too young / poor to drive!).
Such lanes don't normally have a footpath, you walk on the road, as you are entitled to. They tend to twist and turn so visibility is worse. But you're right, people normally do drive over the speed limit.
As usual, you should drive to the conditions - but the conditions include road users other than cars. Sure, you can see a cars headlights coming a long way off, but what about anyone else!
The Sun newspaper? Ha! What will make the Slashdot headlines next? "London Bus Found in Iceberg" - Daily Sport, springs to mind. The Sun is about as reliable as a clockwork orange, and about as red-top tabliod style sensationalist as you get, to boot.
All cars should have a remote-controlled kill switch that is governed by a threshhold system. With every new car comes a remote control with a unique ID. So, if you see a really dangerous/drunk driver swerving all over the road, doing 150 mph, etc., etc., you point and click your remote on him. If X number of people click on him within Y amount of time, his car shuts off and he has to wait an hour before he can go again. Plenty of time for the cops to come pick him up.
There are things to figure out, to be sure. You can't just have a car screech to a halt, but you could have one brake steadily to a stop and pull off to the side of the road. And sure, you could get a turkey who'd build a remote control with randomly rotating id so he alone could KO somebody's ride, but that turkey would in all likelihood be one us geeks; and I'm fine with that.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
This proposal sounds just plain silly.
I dont know how many times I've stopped leaving the front bumper of my car hanging just over the crosswalk line.(Yes, I do check for pedestrians.)
But the way I hear British drivers rip on other British drivers over at drivers.com, maybe things are worse there.
And old principle is at work here. If a society refuses to restrain itself(in this case, behind the wheel), someone else will come in and do the job for it.
If driving in Britain is really that bad, there still has to be a better way of fixing the problem than this.
McDoobie
As many others have pointed out, often static speed limits do not reflect safe speeds for the actual driving conditions. However, if the roadside sensors were equipped with sensors and software to monitor road conditions, traffic volume, average speed, etc. it would probably be possible to adjust the speed limit appropriately, which actually *could* improve safety overall.
nuke the moon
I heard about this proposal about a year ago from yet another sensasionalist source. It was quoted as a possibility by someone and made out to be a policy by the less "reliable" members of the media.
This will likely never happen, as there are too many flaws in the plan, and the costs are far too high. The Sun just likes causing a stir.
Roads in particular will never be totally safe. Many traffic laws in the U.S. don't do any good. Many accidents happen when everyone is obeying the law, and breaking the law hardly guarantees an accident. Many roads have speed limits significantly below their real 'safe' speed and everyone knows it; that's why you see so many people speeding.
The problem is not how fast you drive, or rolling through stop signs. If you're at a red light on an abandoned road with no other cars for miles, why shouldn't you be able to drive though it?
The real problem is poor judgement, accentuated by the attitude (at least in the US) that everyone has a 'right' to drive.
The real solution, which would save numerous lives, and greatly improve traffic as well, is taking idiots off the roads. If you've been at fault for several major accidents; that's it: no more driving. If you're too old and frail to walk unassisted, what makes us think you can stomp the brake down before you hit that farmer's market up ahead? If you repeatedly drink and drive, what right do you have to be on the road?
Unfortunately, politicians don't have the guts to implement this.
P.S.: Learn to merge!
Speeding fines are not to deter bad driving. They are to raise money for the government. Since everyone speeds this would be a great way to tax them and raise revenue for the government. As a side benefit the government could more accurately track people's location and then sell that data to interested parties. This system would also make it harder for criminals to flee the scene of a crime. People driving to a protest could be tracked and then the government could send them a letter explaining their actions so that they could learn why the government is always right. This could also help out with income tax collection from the underground economy. If the government noticed someone going to or from job and not reporting income they could investigate. With all of these great benefits I just can't wait to give up my liberty and privacy. ;)
Stuart Eichert
Suppose they put in some draconian surveillance system - not neccessarily this one or one even similiar to it. There is the issue of how long the data collected should be archived. Realistically speaking, the data could be archived - until the heat death of the universe because of the rapid development of cheaper and cheaper storage solutions, year after year - anyone else think of this?
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
What's to keep folks from disconnecting this gadget, or smashing it... or simply buying their cars in, say, France?
some beaten down, I'll do what you tell me to do mindset of Brits that leads to a lot of posts in favor of this crap. Not being a Brit, I don't know, but what I do know is that this is beyond controlling speeding, going through red lights, etc, and gets VERY deeply into spying on Brit citizens no matter where they go. It looks like Britain is much further along (and still flying hell-bent-for-leather) towards a "Minority Report" sort of surveillance/police state where "they" know precisely where you are at all times. Cameras all over bejeezus, this auto tracking crap. Why not just chip all Brit subjects and have done with it? You wont miss anonymity. You wont miss privacy. You wont miss, well, all your rights. They were just a headache anyway. It is best that the STATE know and control your every move. You don't want/need to hurt yourself, have an affair/lover, a little peace and quiet, read whatever you want, think whatever you want, etc.
Of course, we have a similar evil coming from our own government here in the US. We have a hardcore, rightwing, religious fundy in the Whitehouse and running the Justice Department, and they both are keen to label anyone who thinks differently or has different morals a threat to the US and have them moved Guantanamo. It all boils down to the same thing, label it as much as you want a public safety issue, but ultimately it will be used/abused to squelch dissent and crush dissenters. Sure, it is SUPPOSED to be used to give tickets to lawbreakers, but then, it will also be used to smear political oponents ("What were you doing on such and such street at 11:00 p.m. last Thursday pervert!" or, "Are you sure you want to claim that you are not having an affair? You WERE parked at such and such address overnight quite a few times last year.").
Too bad the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact didn't hang on a few more years. Just THINK what they could have done with this sort of crap! Then again, I'm sure the Taliban and other lunatic religious governments around the world would make great use of such tracking capabilities once they are widely available and cheap. Thus, if a technological setup is such that it COULD be used by an abusive, dictatorial government to maintain iron-fisted control of its subjects then it WILL be and it should be automatically resisted with every breath. Even ostensibly free nations would cease to be free once pervasive tracking and observation is in place.
If the libertarians weren't so fanatically (almost religiously) married to the idea of guns and private property (and the right to pollute/destroy one's property and all that lives on it) above ALL other considerations, then I would be one of them. Unfortunately, you are all frickin' nuts, all fools, and all self-destructive.
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
> In the event that your accelerator sticks and you can't unstick it. Shift to neutral and let the engine blow.
It's better to step on the brake and turn off the ignition switch. Unless your brakes are in bad shape they'll be able to slow the car significantly even with the accelerator all the way down, and switching off the key will stop the engine dead.
Virg
....it's just like that horrible episode of SeaQuest DSV, where the Captain gets fined when speeding by a roadside sensor that automatically deducts money from his social security account.
On second thought, they were all bad episodes....
It's sometimes amazing to see what governments will get up to when they put their minds to it--the shortsightedness and the ability to believe they can depend on the goodwill of their citizens is amazing.
First off, the proposed measure is just plain nasty.
I mean really, these *bugs* which is essentially what these little dossier-stuffers are, are a civil liberties nightmare. Do you really have privacy if the only way you can get to somewhere on one else needs to know about is wear a mask (remember, cameras!) while you pay cash for a bus-ticket?
Second, with criminals from all over the place becoming more and more technologically sophisticated, does anyone outside of governments really believe that a retrofitted, government issue radio transmitter in a car--probably put in a standardized location--will really deter thieves?
Third, it really makes you wonder about culture: how is it that anyone can propose something like this when its safe to assume that anyone can walk into an electronics store and buy books with plans for voltage multipliers in them?
You can already hear people mumbling, 'capacitor, diode, capacitor, diode...'
The end result: a lot of modern electronics works using components that you have to protect from the static charge you accumulate by walking over a carpet and it's hard to imagine these things standing tall after a shot of 10,000 volts AC.
The criminals and savvy anarchists will dance. Everybody else will get to feel a bit more like sheep.
To mail me, remove the 'mailno' from my email addy.
"Yeah. It smells, too..."
The Sun is reporting....
Reporting? In the Sun? That a bit strong isn't it. The Sun is read by morons who are too stupid to form their own opinions.
I wouldn't use the Sun to wipe my arse with. So I'll take this with a pinch of salt....
We all know that when a car comes the other way when pasing some one we should speedup !! X)
Break and go back to where you coma from is what you should do!
CIA Factbook 2002 (US):"Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households
That's debatable. Amongst the informed population, i.e., those who know about guns and choose to research the effects of having an armed population based on what happens in other countries in the world (not just the US, please), it's a very different picture.
"If you make guns illegal, only criminals will have guns," chant the pro-gun lobby. It isn't as simple as that of course, and personally I wouldn't want to see complete legalisation of firearms out of the blue in this country for a variety of reasons, but there's more than a touch of truth in that chant.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
/me files poster under "fool with good intentions". If you want to improve things, don't advocate what you think "ought to work", based on your own presumptions or bias. Do the research into what does work, much of which is readily available when it comes to transport policy, and advocate change to those things that do.
Over-regulation of motorists, and the consequent resources required to enforce those regulations, are precisely the reason there aren't enough police officers available to pull over the dangerous drivers any more; they're too busy fining people for doing 90 on a clear motorway.
The vast majority of drivers, left to their own devices, will drive reasonably safely and without doing really stupid things. Modest improvements in driver education, particularly in the few months following passing a test once a driver has some "real world" experience, have been shown to make things much safer still. Throwing up so-called safety cameras and speed bumps everywhere isn't the answer, it's just a set of irritating distractions spun with a healthy dose of very poor statistical analysis.
None of the above is supposition on my part. It's all well known, and you can read about it in numerous sites on the web if you care to Google into the subject. If you want to help, try getting your local reps to look at the facts, instead of pursuing their own well-intentioned but ultimately more dangerous agendas.
You mean the infrastructure featuring train companies who advise their commuters to take the rest of this week off, so they can get on with necessary maintenance work without the travellers taking 2 hours to finish a journey that usually takes a quarter of that? Yeah, we have a great public transport infrastructure.
Like hell it is. There are plenty of urban UK roads where it is perfectly reasonable to do those speeds. Of course, part of the problem is that you're thinking as though one speed limit could possibly be appropriate for all conditions. There are roads where doing 60 is safe for 90+% of the day, but during an hour when kids are leaving a nearby school doing half that is reckless. Absolute speed limits are a daft idea, end of story.
Who, coincidentally, also make up most of the excessive speeders, runners of red lights, tailgaters, etc.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
... the same kind of action could be taken against war criminals who lie to their people and to the world about Iraq's WOMD.
How about strapping a lie detector on each politician and sacking them and taking their golden handshake away each time the machine says they're lying?
The question is: when will we allow them to get away with this big brother bullshit? Answer: watch them bring WOMD and terrorism into it. And the children - don't forget about the children. They'll play on your heart strings until you can't help but demand that each car has an auto-cop. And you'll only have your stupid gullible selves to blame.
That's a good link; the information there seems pretty complete and it cites the major Acts that are relevant.
NB: The summary provided is somewhat misleading, so if you really want to know, do follow that link.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
That those who propose solutions relying completely on technology understand neither the technology nor the problem.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
You're so right about speed limits; they should be set by independent people who know what they're doing and study the facts, not on the whims of government departments who stand to make money from a beneficial adjustment.
For the benefit of those outside the UK, the "school run" where parents load their little darlings into a 4x4 and then set in solid traffic for 45 minutes, rather than simply walking them the half-mile to school as we always used to, is one of the single worst things about the UK road system today. Providing an effective school bus service to alleviate this would do more than almost any other measure that's been proposed to lift the burden of congestion (as magically happens during school holidays, even though clearly most of the same people are using most of the same roads as much as any other time).
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
What is being proposed is road usage charges which needs some kind of tracking device. This annoys a lot of people including some friends of Murdochs in the road transport industry, hence the reaction.
The government wants to be able to track how far you travel and which roads you use so that you can pay depending upon actual useage. There are privacy issues and it may get used for speed tracking as happens on some toll roads in other countries already. Go to France, average 30Km/h above the speed limit and you will find a fine automatically added to the toll.
There are privacy issues, but at the same time it may be the only way that unnecessary road usage can be reduced. The UK is a small island that is rapidly turning into a car park.
See my journal, I write things there
For some reason otherwise normal law-abiding citizens get defensive when you talk about tougher enforcement of traffic laws. I have always found this to be an interesting part of the modern driver.
Exceeding the speed limit is against the law. When you break the law you deserve to get punished. As voters it is our responsibility to tell our governments what laws we want and then allow them to be enforced. This system has nothing to do with traffic laws only the enforcement of the laws already in place.
The only concern I have seen in this group that appears valid to me is exceeding the speed limit to avoid a dangerous situation. If the system is put in place and there are a reasonable number of roadside readers, say every 3-5 miles on the freeway, this would be an easy situation to solve.
If you are clocked exceeding the speed limit at a station it could make a time stamp of the incident and let the network know that you have exceed the speed limit at xxx time. The speed limit would be known and the distance between stations. If you arrive at the second station too soon (given some allowance for 60 seconds of speeding or similar) then you would be issued a citation.
I don't think I have ever been in a situation where it took me more than 60 seconds to pass another motorist. If it is taking you longer than 60 seconds you are probably better off to slow down and pass the other car later when it is wedged in and you can safely pass.
If I could get this system installed in North Texas I would. I love the idea of everyone being required to obey the law. If the laws are unreasonable then it is up to voters to get them changed, not to limit their enforcement.
My $0.02,
BedivereW
By the time this is developed and implemented, the only people left in our god forsaken country will be those who want this kind of system.
This kind of prating is exactly the type of nonsense I can't abide.
Yeah, 3000 people may be killed in road accidents each year, and that may be a worse stat than for the rail system. So why aren't the same government, who are proposing these crackpot measures, *INVESTING IN RAIL TRAVEL - ESPECIALLY LIGHT RAILWAYS and TRAMS* - mass transport systems which would help to cut down on car use and cut down on motor accidents? Could it be because it's easier and more PROFITABLE to install speed cameras, toll roads, two-plus lanes and charging zones which do more to raise revenue than to actually address the problems of road usage?
I, for one, would be happy to use public transport, if it was reasonably cheap, convienient and available when I needed it - as a motor car is. I suspect the same applies to most drivers in the UK.
Idiot monitoring measures which force people to drive according to artificial conditions are designed for one thing and one thing only. TO RAISE REVENUE.
I won't be voting for Blair or that dunce Prescott next time, I can assure you.
Whoa, must be true, then.
For non-UK readers, other headlines in the Sun's past have included "Gotcha!", commemorating the illegal sinking of an Argentine battleship in international waters by a UK nuclear submarine in 1982, and the famous "Freddy Starr ate my Hamster" which some twenty years ago drew the public's attention to the alleged snack-time habits of a popular Liverpudlian comic.
Suffice it to say, it's not Scientific American.
The Association of Chief Police Officers' official guideline for prosecution in speeding cases is that the vehicle was travelling at more than 10%+2mph over the speed limit. Why? Because if you tried to prosecute everyone who broke the absolute speed limit, the court system would grind to a halt.
Things like spy-in-the-car technology or speed limiters will fail for much the same reason, even if they're ever implemented successfully in the first place. Given that they can't even set up cameras in London that reliably detect people in the new congestion charging zones, there's not much danger of Big Brother sitting on my back seat any time soon.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Few car-pedestrian collisions occur without the car making any attempt to avoid the pedestrian. The car is usually travelling much slower when it hits the pedestrian than its normal speed. Remind me again what the logical or statistical validity of your relative survivability argument was?
I live in a city where the local authorities are a little overzealous in imposing 20mph limits, and very evasive when questioned about their actions. (Plenty of local authorities across the UK currently seem to be overruling the recommendations of traffic experts and putting in 20mph limits anyway, by the way.)
On one particular road that comes to mind, not a single driver keeps to the recently imposed 20mph limit. Not one. Never. At least not in my experience. Why? Because it's a silly and offensive limit. You have excellent visibility, the road is long and straight, the traffic is light, the only significant hazards are a school and a small number of junctions. People now drive faster along that road than when it had a 30 limit, presumably because they figure if there's no point sticking to the limit you might as well drive at what you perceive to be a safe speed. Incidentally, AFAICT the road also has a perfect safety record going back years to before half the buildings were even there.
And your blanket absolute speed limit is a good idea why, again?
Oh, and just give up with the 80-on-a-motorway argument, would you please? Go learn about the magic figure 85% as it relates to speeds and accidents, look at the safety record of motorways in the UK (and perhaps in Germany, where they have no limit at all but have an exemplary safety record) and come back when you have an argument that's more than "I think it should be this, because."
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
people would be having to constantly check their speed and would need constant paranoia to not go over the speed limit; this would cause more problems than it solved, since people would not focus on driving - speeding's not much of a problem anyways, as long people drive with the traffic...the only problem is in insanely fast driver, who normally get pulled over anyways (and cops pulling people over is much better and cheaper than installing such devices in everyone's car). How would they prevent people from hacking/otherwise bypassing the things?
The UK motoring laws may be silly and out of date in some cases, but the driving test isn't one of them. You are not required to take professional tuition before going for a test; pretty much any reasonably experienced and qualified driver can accompany a learner on a public road. Your figures are exaggerated anyway.
Generally speaking, the driving tests here are fair and reasonable. At the end of the test, you receive a detailed report indicating for various areas whether you had minor faults or a major or dangerous fault. There are clear criteria defining how many faults translate into a failure, and test examiners have to justify why they fail every person they don't pass -- which is quite a significant proportion of the tests they take. There is scope for appeal and for having an independent witness riding with you in cases of suspected foul play (not that these are often used other than for an instructor to sit in with a student who repeatedly fails to help identify the persistent problem).
Sure, there's some variability with examiners, but almost all are fair and reasonable. IMHO, the UK driving test is a pretty good base line for deciding whether or not someone is safe to let out on the roads unaccompanied.
Re the silly test failure you mentioned, you shouldn't believe everything you hear about other countries without getting your own information first-hand. What you describe would almost certainly not qualify as a failure in itself, so there's pretty much guaranteed more to it than the story told. If I believed everything I was told about the US, I'd think it was full of capitalist, litigious, war-mongering, overly religious pricks with no regard for anyone outside their own country, who consume nothing but burgers, donuts and sodas, say "Have a nice day" all the time without ever really meaning it, shoot anyone who comes into range and have a penchant for Britney Spears in a schoolgirl uniform. Fortunately, I know better. See my point?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
This system will make the journey to see my mum about 30% longer. Meaning I will go less often (she lives 120 miles away. Moving closer isn't practical because we don't have a good spread of jobs (tech is mostly the south and south east) and she's getting older as you might expect.
The point? This measure could destroy the way of life in the UK as we know it. Maybe that will be good. Maybe this plan will just ensure the current government is never re-elected once people realise the full implications.
Over dramatic probably but it's a real risk. I don't think people appreciate just how massive a proportion of journeys involve speeding at some point.
I grew up in the UK and feel it is safe to say the sun is void of anything that might be remotely described as the truth.
I thought the same thing reading this article. The tabloid press in Norway frequently quote "The National Enquirer" in their more dubious stories. Sounds good to a Norwegian that has never heard of the Enquirer. Lies, or perhaps just plain stupidity on behalf of the journalists.
And police reckon terror suspects and criminals could also be targeted more effectively.
yep...want anything to get through parliment...link it with terrorism
"Yes, that's right...we want to charge an extra $10 a year for dog licenses...we believe there is a link between dog owners and terrorism"
And can we please also get it so that it tacks on if you're riding right on someone's bumper... and those assholes who always have to go through the intersection after my light has already turned green...
I've wanted something like this for years. Great idea!
Considering these guys as reputable press is like calling donuts health food.
This sig no verb.
When reading the article (oh wait, this is slashdot..)bear in mind that The Sun is a part of News International (Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, etc) and knows very well how much profit there is in rabble-rousing and saying what people want to hear..
Drivers in the UK feel put-upon for various reasons, like the high price of fuel (believe me, US citizens should not complain about fuel prices!), but the main reason that driving is an ordeal over here is the sheer number of cars/trucks/buses in a limited roadspace.
As it is, a great deal of the UK has been sacrificed to cars, and the cities almost entirely so. Building more roads is simply not an option in many places.
Cars themselves are cheaper than ever in the UK, thanks to the European Common Border Agreement, and there is an ever-rising number of cheap second-hand vehicles on the market.
The only way to limit pressure on the roads is to drive up the price of motoring, and a large increase in vehicle duty or fuel tax would be politically disadvantageous for any government, so other ways can be found. This being said, I do not see how the current government would think that imposing a compulsory electronic cop in every car would prove any more popular..
Motorists were (and remain) up in arms over the issue of radar-triggered cameras in well-known speeding blackspots, where transgressors receive fixed-penalty fines through the post after being photographed. The move was understandably described as 'a cynical revenue-generating ploy'.
While revenue was the main impetus to the deployment of these cameras, am I the only one who considers it alarming that drivers object to being forced to observe the speed limit? Driving faster greatly increases the likelihood of accident, especially in complex environments like UK cities (our cities were laid out a long time before cars came along). Running through red lights is even more likely to cause a disaster.
If the prospect of having your teeth forced into your oesophagus by your steering wheel isn't enough to make you drive responsibly, maybe a 30 fine is..
Of course, I travel by bus, so I don't give a fuck. I can read a book in peace while someone else deals with the road. More significantly, my vehicle weighs twelve and a half tons. Crash into me and I'm barely aware of it. You're fucked, airbag or not...
While this is sure excessive, it's remarkable that air traffic, in my understanding, has to submit a flight plan in advance and is constantly (is it only near airports?) monitored by radar. Yet nobody (that I know about) protests this.
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
This was only announced to divert attention away from the Government's rather dodgy position in the Hutton enquiry ... dead scientists, dodgy war memos ... the list goes on.
Just before the Iraq II war we had an announcement about taxing the sale of houses - a similar ploy to try and divert attention away from a rather corrupt Labour party's inner connivings.
Let's face it - how on earth is a device in a car going to be able to tell if you're in a bus-lane or not - with current tech ?
Sigh
For American readers, don't take anything that appears in The Sun too seriously. It's a bit Weekly World Newsish targeted at the absolute lowest mental ability level. The people that read The Sun are the sort that would be outraged at a "magic gizmo" that fined them every time they went over the speed limit. It will never happen.
Would it be a PVR style of setup, and at a fill-up of petrol (gas for us USians) you need to download the data?
Or would it be a wireless thing?
Now if it were a wireless thing ... couldn't that be jammed?
And couldn't the camera be painted over? I suppose paint would be outlawed ... at least we would still have our Sharpies ...
Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
one of the most interesting things i have read in a long time.
Just jam the damn signal! It's not that hard people. The signal strength just has to be higher than the sensor's/or beacon on the roadway.
Why complain? We're supposedly all smart hacker types here. All it takes is one person to figure out how to break the technology, and suddenly all the smart people will be immune to traffic violations! I say we should push for a totally automated society, so that we can more easily bypass getting caught and enjoy the rewards.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
Does this mean that every time you have to make an "illegal" manouver in order not to be killed by some other idiot that you'll have to defend your actions in court?
On the other side of coin, how about a vampire car that steals the IDs of the cars around it and emits them to the beacons? You'd leave a trail of tickets behind you as you went flying merrily on your way, probably nary a cop to pull you over since they'll be relying ot the computers to enforce the speed limits.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
A mandatory monitoring law would never fly in the U.S. This type of law would be considered an invasion of privacy and would violate citizen's rights.
That sounds the the vehicular equivalent of the Homeland Security. I assume that all this stuff is probably not paid for but rather you are simply ordered to have this work done and this MOT check back at your home to see that it is done. If not I am guessing the vehicle in question goes to the compacter that afternoon.
It is generally well known that most media in the US is slanted left. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that it was the opposite, but I would consider doing a bit more research. TV is left, except Fox news which is right, not center as they would have you believe, newspapers are left, and even most magazines that dispense news tend to the left. I'd be interested for someone to come up with a plausable explanation of why this is.
Just break the antenna off, block it with tinfoil, or do something equally destructive to it's ability to send the data. Keep your mail nice and empty. I'm sure they will have something to make sure this doesn't happen.
Now, what would be interesting would be to forge someone elses car (preferably an enemies), then drive around like crazy one night. Muhahah! Or, just find the encoding scheme, and send millions of dollars worth of fines to the enemy! hahah...HAHAHAH...MUHAHAH!
People will deactivate these chips, hack them, "customise them". Imagine that neighbour you hate, reprogram your chip and go 150mph in a 30 zone, sounds like a fucking plan! They lose their licence and you get a no risk thrill. Apart from the risk of knocking someone down not looking when they're crossing. Before you get moral on me, if people don't look before stepping out, they're as bad as the people who don't drive with due care and attention, kids included. The uneducated masses will just steal cars to get a thrill from driving, much like they do now.
In most U.S. states we have nifty little stickers which the state sells us when we pay the registration fee. The sticker goes on the rear license plate and the police can easily see if you've got this year's sticker on your plate. You won't get far with a homemade plate either.
In some U.S. states, depending on the type of vehicle, the plate itself expires (i.e. the plate is stamped with the two-digit year). For those unfamiliar with U.S. license plates, they're made of sheet steel with the numbers and expiration embossed as well as painted in reflective paint.
In either case, the plate (and sticker) is produced and issued by the state and counterfeiting either is not terribly easy.
So the cops can scan a queue of traffic for license validity just by driving past... What a complete waste of money! Talk about inappropriate application of technology! If the plates (or stickers stuck on the plates) showed when the vehicle registration expires the cops could just use their eyes and look at the license plate. No chips, no detector boxes, no scanners, just stickers.
Putting moderation advice in your
Lots of people here seem to be asking whether this is a "good" idea or not, and weighing the pros and cons of it. They're completely missing the point. The real question here is, what kind of a nation gives its government the power to do such a thing in the first place? That government which governs least governs best. Schemes such as this one are clear evidence that the British government has ceased to be the servant of its people and has become their master. The sickest part is that this inversion of power was not obtained through force but rather because the British people laid down their political power and now their rights are being slowly eroded as well. The next time some nitwit wants to ask me why I own guns and support the second amendment I'll use this as an example of the LEAST severe thing that can result. If you want examples of the MOST severe things, take a trip to North Korea or Cuba sometime. Democracy is that system of government where the people as a whole hold political power, and political power comes from the barrel of a gun. If guns didn't exist it would come from the edge of a sword. The ability to exert force is the only real power there is in the world. All other forms of power are simply layers of abstraction laid down on top. So if the day ever comes to pass where you're spied upon by your own government that is supposed to be subservient to you, and you wonder to yourself how this came to be, look no further than the day you let yourself be disempowered by your future rulers.
In short, ideas like this one have the audacity to escape the lips of british policymakers for the simple reason that the british people have pissed away their political power. If they know what is good for them they'll pull their heads out of their asses and work on winning it back.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Would someone please tell me why we keep using preventative laws like this when it has become patently obvious that they don't work as intended and merely end up causing huge problems for non-evildoers? In other words, why don't we get rid of the speed limit and prosecute those who actually injure others or damage property?
You will no doubt respond that we would do so in a "perfect" world, but in the "real" world, we need laws like this since people don't act responsibly. I say bullshit. What kind of person is irresponsible enough not to go slow enough to avoid hitting people (and the HUGE consequences that come along with it, such as going to jail), yet would scrupulously follow the speed limit to avoid a small fine?
-Mike
Nah, it merely proves that I read the Grauniad.
You can carry a swiss army knife (although airport customs sometimes don't like them and may make them travel in the hold) but not a lock-knife or bowie knife with a large blade. I can't think of a single time when I'd need one of these in daily life unless I was a butcher/hunter etc - you don't need a blade more than a couple of inches long to cut rope, etc. I also can't see any reason why you should be allowed to bring such a knife into a public place like a football match
I can, however, see why you shouldn't be allowed to bring a large bladed knife into a football ground, what with hooliganism etc etc.
Any secretary that claims to need a paper knife shaped like a "small sword" - well, I'd employ them to fend off vendors, but I'd find it hard to justify a blade like that rather than, say a letter-opener
So much for we are the great bastion of democratic society and all the other non-conformist governments are facist pigs.
I don't think that they even have this level of surveilance in the supposedly facist China today.
What's to stop these monitors from monitoring more than they said they are monitoring?
Its just a cost lowering way to ensure income to the government while reducing costs (ie you need to hire less police officers)
pffft. democracy, freedom, justice for all... freaking catch phrases for the Bush-Blair propanganda machine.
I think the Chinese and the Indians have a monopoly between them on this one.
The muslims are nowhere close to catching up to those 2 even when you take the chinese muslims (minority) and indian muslims into account.
"They're called boobs, Ed."
"Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
Unfortunately, with the increasing cost of insurance, and an increasing number of drivers getting banned from totting up 4 minor speed camera catches, there are currently 10% of motorists driving unlicensed and uninsured. There simply aren't the resources available at the moment to do anything about this.
in other news, capt. Dredd of the metropolitan police, said
"in near future, policemen will be privided with golden armors, and big guns, and they will have the right to literaly burn out infringing cars. this new generation of policemen will be named 'Judges'. My name will then be Judge Dredd!! I am the Law!"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Unfortunately, due to the combined speed of both vehicles the tax disc is only visible and recognisable to a police officer traveling in the opposite direction for a short time, unless both cars are moving slowly. The sticker on the rear plate is visible to a police car from behind for a comparatively long time. On a motorway for example, a police officer can just glance at the rear plate to see if it's still valid.
No computers required. I don't understand why the government in the UK always selects the most complicated, expensive, and invasive option available for simple problems.
In the meantime, you are now eight times more likely to be mugged in London than in New York City. It used to be the other way around, but I suppose spending the Greater London police budget on computers rather than doing actual policework makes sense in some bizarre beaurocratic way.
If 10% of motorists are racking up enough minor speeding offences to lose their licenses, it might be time to reconsider the direction the UK government is moving. Once everyone's been banned from driving they'll start issuing tickets for running on a public street.
This may be an American attitude, but I think most reasonable people would agree that the government has no business knowing where my car is at any particular time unless it's involved in a crime.
Putting moderation advice in your
Actually, there were 1,579,566 arrests for drug law violations in 2000.
Well, I have no official numbers to back it up, as such things would be impossible to get, but I'm betting at least 20-30 million people used some kind of illegal drug in the last year in America. So only 1.5 mil arrests, that isn't very much enforcement percentage-wise.
Just imagine what it would be like if everyone got busted every time they used a drug...such a system would not be enforcible either technically or politically. Like traffic violations, drug enforcement requires selective prosecution to be feasible.
Of course, my guess could be wrong...
The preceding comments reflect the author's personal opinion and are public domain, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
It's worth noting that the fish wrap this article appeared in a tabloid owned by Rupert Murdoch, a man whose publications are not known for their in-depth reporting skills. The Sun is only slightly more fact based than, that bastion of journalistic integrity, the Weekly World News .
and the werewolves came...
and they ate him...
and they drank his beer...
(lelo text)
Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
Nave H. Weiss
i doubt you have to double clutch to change gears because you don't have a synchromesh gearbox
Double-clutch downshifting to match engine revs while decelerating is a beautiful thing when done properly.
Heel and toe downshifting is a bit more complex.
OK, mostly the cowed population of Fascist Europe.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
now, which motorist is gonna drive a car which works against their personal interest by spying on them? only an eedibo!
Yush intelligently covers cutting edge urban entertainment, music, trends, street style & culture at http://yush.co
> How do you figure? You have no idea what my personal political leanings are.
No, he doesn't. But "right-wing" and "left-wing" are relative terms. For example, Sen. Lieberman considers Gov. Dean to be a purveyor of "dangerously extremist politics", yet Dean would likely be seen by most here in Britain as quite moderate, and probably would fit comfortably into the British Conservative Party.
As an example, many US Dems and Republicans consider the very idea of a national health system to be "left-wing", yet in the rest of the world it's not seen that way: all the G8 countries apart from the US have state-run national health systems of some sort. The typical USian criteria for classifying "left" and "right" are different to other countries.
So I'd guess that the previous AC was asking if you're right-wing, because it seems to us here outside the US, looking at what seems to may of us an incredibly right-wing US press, that anyone who considers it to be "left-wing" must be fairly "right-wing" by our measure.
That's not a personal attack, it's merely an observation that the terms are defined differently by different people.
> This seems to be the response whenever I discuss this topic.
Hmm. Then maybe whenever you discuss the topic, you express a viewpoint to the right of those readers? Nothing wrong with that, surely?