Slashdot Mirror
Spies Riding Shotgun
Slashdot has covered before the proliferation of black boxes - event data recorders - in modern automobiles, that automatically record data about what the car has been doing and make it available after the fact to police, insurance companies, and people suing you - just about everyone except you, in fact. We'll add to that with yet another story about the computerized spy riding shotgun in your new car.
This article quotes Erick Skrum of the National Motorists Association. It's a great political organization that fights multiple battles of interest to motorists, including black boxes.
Consider joining the NMA: http://www.motorists.org/
Haven't seen the purchase agreement for all cars, but generally they don't say that racing will void your warranty.
And accelerating to the maximum speed, especially on cars with a rpm or speed limiter isn't abuse.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
If your question is at all serious, there are products that you can use.
For instance, The CarChip.
My personal belief is vehement opposition to this kind of monitoring. Nevertheless, it is available. If she's driving a car you own, you can install it without any problem. If the car is hers, you might want to check with an attorney before installing any monitoring/spying equipment.
Jim
Think "witch trials", people being forced to confess to things they hadn't done... don't see how this is such an issue with DNA samples and whatnot...
Tim
Not integerated, It is the Air Bag computer. You can remove it, but your air bags will not work. Cutting the wires is a bad Idea, you could set off the air bags.
It was in the newspaper a few months ago. There had been an accident on the local highway involving several cars - you know the scene, one guy driving too close to another, the guy in front brakes, and suddenly 5 cars crash into each other. And suddenly another guy crashes into the cars and there's a second pileup.
A number of witnesses swore blind to the cops that the guy had made no attempt to slow down and was speeding. Cops asked for, and were given, permission to access the black box data, which confirmed the guy did try to brake and that he wasn't speeding. So his black box prevented his being charged and possibly arrested.
Ironically, the cops required the car owner's permission to access the black box data; the insurance company does not require permission to access the black box data.
Any vehicle on the road today can have its ECU replaced by a standalone engine management system. Once it's installed, you can then genuinely hack your car's engine as well. If you don't like expensive propretiary systems, there's even "open source" alternatives like MegaSquirt
Divide by zero hurts my brain.
There's a reason you can be compelled to give DNA and other physical samples as evidence against you. See here for a more detailed explanation of why. Here's the executive summary:
You are absolutely correct quoting the Fifth Amendment. The courts are trying to fulfill the policy goal of making sure that witnesses aren't erroneously convicted of a crime. The phrase "witness against himself," obviously means that you shouldn't have to incriminate yourself with testimony. Even if you are innocent, however, you can still feel pressure in the witness box. If you stutter or 'choke', a jury could mistake that as a sign of guilt. On the other hand, DNA evidence, urine samples, and yes, data from a 'black box', don't have this problem. They represent hard evidence, and are much less likely to lie than you are. They can still be contested, like any evidence. Fingerprinting in particular has been called into question of late. Nevertheless, this sort of evidence doesn't fall within the narrow reading of "witness" in the Fifth Amendment, because it isn't being restricted by the same policy considerations. Therefore, you can be compelled to turn it over without running afoul of the Constitution.
There are privacy concerns to be sure. Of course, if you're speeding, then you're speeding. You're still in favor of cops arresting people using radar detectors, right? (Arguments about speeding being a victimless crime go elsewhere.) Somehow, it doesn't seem to me to make a difference whether the radar 'gun' is in his car or yours. Some of the arguments so far seem to be "oh shit, now I can't speed or I'll get into trouble." That doesn't impress me. The GPS tracking arguments are a little more worrisome, but not much more. You have a GPS or other location tracking system in your cell phone, right? You do take your phone with you in the car, don't you?
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.