Slashdot Mirror
NTSB Recommends Black Boxes For All Cars
linuxwrangler writes "Officials at the National Transportation Safety Board are recommending the government require data recorders in all passenger vehicles. David Sobel of EPIC says his group has privacy concerns - especially when drivers are unaware of the presence of the devices. Auto black-boxes have been covered here before."
Fortunately Big Brother's motives always so obviously have our best interests at heart...
policy analysis and political satire
I think the point of logging data is to capture vehicle and road/driving conditions when "something happens" (i.e. accident). Cars already log a lot of troubleshooting data today with the advent of OBDI and up. I think mainly the privacy concerns are related to someone misusing the data in the black box. I, for one, wouldnt be too thrilled if one day when you go to register your vehicle (an annual event) or get your car inspected/smogged, they download the data and see how many times you've exceeded "safe speeds" and then issue citations and tickets. I'm sure there are good uses (such as determining fault in an accident), but the potential for abuse could be disturbing.
How 'bout we set up the following system:
1) The black box will register things such as speed, acceleration, position of the steering wheel, gear shift, pedals, emergency brake, etc.
2) It will not monitor stuff such as GPS
3) It will loop every [30] seconds or so (just a suggestion, maybe a little more)
4) Data will only be available following a crash in which injuries or serious physical damage resulted or with the owner's consent.
5) Optionally, this information will not be available to insurance companies or for prosecution in either civil or criminal cases. I think that the data should be available, but I can see valid objections to this.
That way the safety people get what they want -- a system that will provide information about what happens in a crash -- while not acting very big brothery.
I sincerely hope that was sarcasm. There are things that are legal but should remain private, like business dealings or sexual preferences. Using that rationale we could literally institute 1984 tomorrow, and it would be just dandy with you. Do you really want your toaster reporting back to the government?
You also misunderstand the technology, black boxes are passive monitoring devices. They transmit nothing, they just record.
"However, I think the public good of having what would probably be a significantly higher rate of correctly assigning blame in accidents outweighs the privacy issue, at least from a philosophical standpoint. Not sure about a legal one."
People like you are the ones allowing our Civil Liverty to go down the tolit. You really mean you want to give up ANY MORE privacy to the U.S Govt just so we can see who was wrong in a car wreck..??
This is what the media does for the govt they scare people all the time with this car accident lead to 60 people dead, this black drug dealer killed 2 white wemen, we are changing the US state of alert to code RED because terrorists are in the US be carefull at your local malls and stores.
Then the next thing you hear is this bill got signed to protect us against terrorists (Patriot Act gets signed), make GUNS illegal so Black drug dealers can't shoot white wemen with them any more.. new gun laws get passed (more criminal have guns less Citizens have them)... now we need black boxes in cars because 60 people died.. black boxes help law enforcement with car crash investigations (read, INS companies get off the hook more often and are paying less and less claims due to black boxes), Single Mother Killed in Car Accident, Hit by drunk Driver family asking community for support due to INC company refusal to pay because she was going 6mi over the speed limit children devistated, New Sky Rise Complex gets built in Denver Colorado Today (INS companyes have more money to invest in realestate)...etc...etc...etc..
Really WANA save lives protest your Govt from invading countries and blowing them up, stop the media from acting as an agent of terrorism, I think 9pm news causes more terror then the black drug dealer I walked by down town yesterday.
WAKE UP, stop buying into all this B.S hype!!
-=Linsys=-
http://www.intrusionsec.com
Lets put it differently, what would you call someone who is charged with rape and ordered to donate DNA for investigation and then says NO because it may finger me in previous rapes I commited?
This is an entirely different situation.. obviously if you've been ORDERED to provide a DNA sample, there is a QUESTION as you whether or not you were involved with the crime.. hence, you were CHARGED with rape in the first place..
A better question would've been, what would you call someone who is NOT charged with rape and ordered to donate DNA for investigation and then says NO?
I'd call that guilty until proven innocent..
US need a MUCH MORE rigorous drivers training program - most other country with a large road network has one: Japan, Germany (I think most of europe), heck even China. Black boxes may convict the dangerous drivers, but it won't stop people from being killed.
At least support something that will solve the *root* of your problems: doing away with generations of bad drivers teaching their kids who turn out to be even worse drivers.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
"If a black box helped make enforcing that speed limit afordable (i.e. more enforcement without hiring more police) then that'd be great."
Enforcing laws that the majority disagree with using machines merely brings the law into disrepute. There's a reason why we have people enforcing most laws, because they can actually decide when behaviour is dangerous and when it's not, and act accordingly.
A machine can't make any such decision: your 'black box', for example, would happily let people drive at 35mph in a 35mph limit in thick fog on a snowy road, but would stop them from driving at 40mph on the same road in clear weather. That's ludicrous and most people understand that... enforcing laws in such a stupid way will simply convince people of clue (at least those not already convinced) that the law is an ass.
I'd also add that in the last decade we've seen speed cameras almost completely take over from traffic police for traffic law enforcement here in the UK. The end result is that the standard of driving in this country has gone from quite decent to absolutely appalling, and the death rate, which had been dropping for decades, has started to go up.
Good point, Timbo, but everyone concentrates on how we get tracked on the move. Isn't the real danger the databases that all this information is feeding into. Scares me. Check out http://www.computing.co.uk/specials/1153206
You are worried that someone abuses the black box but you are abusing the absence of a black box by breaking the law.
Let's not forget that he may be abusing the absence of a hidden camera in his bedroom to break the law there too. And he sure could be abusing the absence of a GPS implant in his skull to go places he shouldn't.
It's not just the system mis-used to capture non-criminals that alarms me, but the system used at all to treat people as guilty until proven innocent. If you ask me, it's you if-you're-not-breaking-the-law-you've-got-nothing- to-fear types to blame for the privacy and liberty we've lost thus far.
Making the world a better place, one psychotic episode at a time.
1. Please study history. It's not the people in power, it's the nature of power itself. Throughout history the same things happen. The USA was designed to be different, but only if the populace remains vigilant (and of course, we're not any longer).
2. Do you seriously believe that once the black boxes are in cars, and once the populace is used to the idea, that government WON'T expand on its use? 30 minutes? Why not 90 minutes in case the car's involved in a hit-and-run? Who can argue against that? Why not RFID transmitters on your car too so when you speed past a checkpoint, they can ring you up for speeding? At that point, why not an RFID transmitter implanted in your arm so that the speed trap can detect exactly who was behind the wheel?
3. There is no reason for the government to be monitoring our activities. This should really be the first argument against this kind of nonsense. What I do in my car, even for 30 minutes at a time, is NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution denies the government the ability to watch over us without probable cause. Are you seriously suggesting that all drivers will probably do something illegal with their cars?
4. I believe privacy concerns would be assuaged somewhat if you limited such "black boxes" to only those who've been convicted of traffic crimes more serious than a simple speeding ticket, and only for a limited time (a form of parole or probation).
5. If an insurance company wanted to give out a large discount for drivers who plant these devices in their cars, more power to them. I'm sure many consumers, who are not worried about privacy, would be more than happy to get a 40% discount on their insurance. The libertarian in me wants to say that's between the insurance company and the driver, but the problem is, our nannies, er, I mean, government, has decreed that all shall have insurance, and there's a slight bit of regulation on the whole industry, so that plan wouldn't work.
6. Please, please stop with the "benefit each and every person" platitudes. It only serves to mark you as naive.
The issue described by the parent of this post is profoundly important. It goes to the very issue of citizen rights. In a country where your rights are issued you by the State and you live on its permits, the logic of allowing this sort of information to be used against you without a serious condition such as an accident or personal injury is hard to understand. There you didn't have the rights anyway. In such a case there is no question of the use of this data.
In Nation(s) such as the USA where the Citizen has the rights and they are leased to the State by a Constitution, the authorities must have "Probable Cause" to bring a warrant. (Real or imminant danger of an offense) A person cannot be compelled to testify against themselves. In such a State this data is not just a matter of its existence, it is a matter of violation of citizen rights to compel it.
I know I will hear from some idiot who remarks about driving not being a "right" but a "privilege." This has always been a questionable ruling of law covering the requirement to carry a drivers license and for "implied consent" for Drug testing of drivers (DUI). If people accept that such an "implied consent exists, they may as well allow electronic devices that can control the car's speed and prevent violations all of the time. But this would defeat the purpose of the violations and citations because they are really issued for revenue reasons and not public safety reasons.
Also violations that are issued by vending machine as these would be have absolutely no consideration of circumstances or conditions.
It might be acceptable under "Probable Cause" to evaluate the data if an accident has occurred. There you have probable cause to look.
Non USA posters will probably not understand this because the logic of most if not all other nations is that the power is the right of the State (Nation syn State) and a person merely gets their rights from a State. Note the (s) after State(s) above. The USA is 50 Nations in a Constitutional Federal Republic. These are nations on their own right. Several of these States approximately equal the greatest of States of the rest of the world (Non-USA) in economic power. Most of these States (USA) have armed forces ranking on their own in the world as world powers and I am not talking about the US Army/Air Force/Navy etc. The Citizens of these States(USA) have their rights and they lease them by Constitution to the States etc.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
No no no, it is NOT the car manufacturers who are pushing. It's the INSURANCE companies. Remember they have a vested interest in keeping track of every "bad" thing you do in order to jack up already exhorbitant rates.
I REALLY hate insurance companies.
Self awareness - try it!
Has much thought been given to the quantity of data involved and how long it will it need to be archived ?
Accidents happen very quickly and so, to be useful in accident analysis, readings would have to be taken many times a second. Readings would probably include wheel position, accelerator position, braking state, grip, suspension movement, temperature, weather(!) as well as all the internal readings from inside the engine. This could amount to a considerable stream of data.
How would this data be stored ? Solid state or hard drive ? Would there need to be a mandatory minimum size for the log? One week's data or one year? Could it be an offence not to have enough capacity?
Would the on-board log wrap round or would it get reset? Could the driver reset the log? Would it be an offence to reset the log immediately after an accident?
If the log was used for maintaining the car would the garage doing the servicing have to download the log? Would they have to pass on details to the police? Would you be allowed to carry out servicing at home or only at "authorised" garages?
In imagining uses for this log it is interesting to note the differences between the US and the UK when it comes to the use of aircraft "black boxes". US airlines are required to record a minimal set of parameters and then these are used as part of any crash investigation. UK airlines, on the other hand, are required to record hundreds of parameters and each log has to undergo computer analysis after every flight. This analysis looks for values (or combinations) outside normal ranges and is used to trigger preventative maintenance and more detailed safety inspections.
Paul
www.opencouncil.org
Open
You missed an important point in your tirade about personal rights.
You have the absolute right to drive a vehicle any time you want, any way you want without registration or license in the US... as long as its on your private property.
The government isn't granting you the privelidge to operate a motor vehicle, they're granting you the privelidge to operate that vehicle on property owned by the state. The state owns the roads. The state owns the highways. They can (and will) grant you license to use them, and can (and will) revoke that license.
If the government wishes to require that vehicles operated on their roads must track your speed, be able to limit that speed electronically, be disabled by officers or any other option, if the lawmakers representing the people pass those laws, thats just the way it is. Pull that crap out and drive around in circles inside your private compound if you don't like it. You have that right.
I disagree with this as well, but it does nothing to help prevent these laws from being passed when you use silly, irrational arguments spouting about personal rights like one of those "IRS is illegal" whackos.
-John
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it. jya.com/ap.htm