Slashdot Mirror
E-Tracking May Change the Way You Drive
frdmfghtr writes "ZDNet.com is running a story about a runaway idea of a tracking automobiles via GPS. Not to be confused with the Canadian project geared towards anti-speeding ideas, this one does in fact have the goal of tracking your vehicle. 'The U.S. Department of Transportation has been handing millions of dollars to state governments for GPS-tracking pilot projects designed to track vehicles wherever they go. So far, Washington state and Oregon have received fat federal checks to figure out how to levy these 'mileage-based road user fees.' However, the article goes on to talk about how there is no provision in place to prevent the uncontrolled surveillance of motorists without a court order."
mileage-based road user fees.
Didn't we pay taxes to build the roads in the first place? Will these fees be accompanied by the reduction of taxes, since they are getting transportation funding elsewhere?
This could be useful in figuring out which roads need expansion, and it could help with traffic routing. Imagine the effect on stoplights. They'll know which way has the biggest backup, etc. Of course, they could do most of this non-invasively.
Of course, this'll be touted as an anti-theft thing or something, and everyone will jump all over it.
> However, the article goes on to talk about how there is no provision in place to
> prevent the uncontrolled surveillance of motorists without a court order.
Cue the "well if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about" government apologists.
As an avid cyclist, I'd love to assume it will end at user fees. But just because that's what the system is designed for doesn't mean that's how this stuff will end up.
If this kind of thing goes live I'd say that it's just a matter of time before some desperate politician campaigns on turning this into an "anti-terrorism" device... similar tracking systems are already in place for trains and (obviously) airplanes. Between this and RFID I'd say that it's just a matter of time until either the government or our employer knows our location (give or take a couple meters) 24/7.
(Yes, I am paranoid.. thanks for pointing that out)
We already have mileage based tracking without GPS. It's called an odometer.
In states with annual inspections, it's trivial to record odometer readings too, and tax based on that.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Why stop there? I'd be willing to pay more taxes so that the government could install surveillance cameras in every room of every citizen's home. It would help with illegal drug usage, private gambling, prostitution, wife-beating, child molestation, and a whole host of other problems. If you don't have anything to hide you really shouldn't be against it. The possibilities are limitless.
Why not just check the odometer? Most if not all cars have odometers, and few people tamper with them. Most drivers could simply get their mileage checked whenever they have their vehicle inspected and/or renew the vehicle's license plates. Any taxes based on emissions could be assessed on fuel rather than based on mileage. I could drive my car 45 mph to my parents and take 20 hours and use far less gas than my friend who drives there at 80 mph in 12 hours.
I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
The possibilities are limitless.
/.er's complain about the death of personal responsibility every time there's a stupid lawsuit, how is this any different? Either way, citizens are expecting someone else to prevent them from exercising their free will.
They are, and that's what makes some of us nervous.
If you dont have anything to hide you really shouldnt be against it.
But most of us do have something to hide. As it stands now almost all of us are criminals in our own way (whether it's 'forgetting' to pay all of our taxes, smoking a little pot, or cruising at 5 over) and I, for one, don't mind that one bit.
A government which observes its populace's every move is the ultimate nanny state...
Why shouldn't those who use a public facility more be also forced to pay more?
It seems pretty straightforward to me.
Of course. But why implement a huge, complex and expensive tracking system when there is an existing mechanism to charge road users based on usage?
It's called a gas tax. You drive more, you pay more tax. Simple and efficient. If you want to get a little fancier, the DMV charges more to register heavy vehicles (which damage the road more) than lighter vehicles.
The only reason to have this GPS system is to track the population, and they're trying to sell it as a "road-usage" fee.
It's almost time to vote from the rooftops.
"But yes, it is in the constitution that they can't do that, so it shouldn't be allowed. But that's the only reason against it."
Actually, it is not expressly protected, and courts have (in a round about way) ruled against citizens in related cases. However, if it was protected by the Constitution, it should not be reduced to "the only reason," because, in the US, that's a big reason.
"It's not like your wife can log into the satellites and find out you've got a gay lover."
Obviously not, but they did mention the information being subpoenaed, which is quite possible and would have similar results.
"The only bad thing about it is, it's against the constitution."
Again, it's not against the Constitution under its current interpretation, but if it is found to be in the courts, it won't be for some trivial reason. You say this as though if it was not in the Constitution, people would have no problem with it, but that is not the situation at all.
Odometers can be run back a bit (not recommended) if you want (between inspections). Also, they don't say where the driving took place. If I live in West Virginia and commute to DC, I'm using Virginia's roads, but West Virginia is the one charging me under your plan.
(I actually live in Virginia and have the roads clogged by the aforementioned commuters)
How do they propose to install one of these devices in any of my vehicles??
There will be no such device ever installed in any vehicle I ever own.
BTW, all of my vehicles are over 20 years old and long ago fully paid for in full.
They'll have just as much luck installing one of these things in my vehicle as they will inserting a RFID chip under my skin.
Not only is this completely unnecessary but let me get one thing straight. We do not have the right to abuse our power as citizens but the government has the power to go beyond it's boundaries and watch our every move? What is this bull. There is no point in monitoring someone's progress in car. In order to solve a problem you need to find the root cause of it. If you want us traveling at a slow 50-mph then there should be no cars in the united states which can go beyond that limit. So why do we still see GTO's, Porsche and other cars which are never designed to go just at 50MPH. Your wasting money on this crap. Also GPS cannot work where it does not get a signal. So in some states this would simply be useless. For then you come up with another thing out of your @@@ which is less reliable than the other. Good Job. Keep screwing us over.
And you care if the police know your location... why?
Because there are quite a few laws in this great nation which I (occasionally) ignore. I speed, I drink* (not at the same time, mind you), smoke illicit drugs... I don't feel I do any of these things in a reckless manner, and feel that my behavior is in line with the American spirit of freedom.
The ability to exercise my free will as mentioned above would be rendered impossible were the government able to watch my every move, convict me of my every 'crime.' In short, I have no fear of being called a terrorist.. at worst I could be labeled a drug addict, unfortunately that would be enough to land me in jail (no voting rights, no freedom).
* a criminal offense because I'm not 21...
Also, there's a big difference between tracking you when you're in a public space (like a road) and installing a camera into your home so policemen can watch you jack off.
And there's my beef: the slippery slope. If we let this fly, watch the "big difference" between them disappear. It isn't anyone's GOD DAMNED business when and where I go. I like to keep it that way.
No offense friend, but you trust the Government too much. Haven't you learned anything from 1984? Could you ever imagine technology like this if Hitler was in power, after all, he was elected. I think people think just because they live in what they believe to be a free Country, such as America, that you are immune to these types of realities. No me, no way, I'll walk.
The ability to exercise my free will as mentioned above would be rendered impossible were the government able to watch my every move, convict me of my every 'crime.'
You'll still be able to exercise you're free will. You'll just be punished in accordance with the law whenever you do something that breaks it. There are no parantheses around crime. If the law says it's illegal, it's a crime.
The problem with law enforcement agencies becoming more efficient with enforcing laws, is up until now they haven't been able to get TOO efficient. So people haven't cared too much about things being illegal.
How about instead of attacking the law enforcement agencies for trying to do their job (protect and serve the people by enforcing the laws their representatives enact on behalf of their constitutents), you work towards changing the laws? But then again, that's much more difficult. It's much easier to simply break the law, and hope you don't get caught.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
the uk's plans stems from the when more and more vehicles use alternative fuels, its easy to stick 70%+ tax on petrol/gas but they can't tax electricity by the same amounts (i hope)As soon as the system is in place it will be abused by those in power or by people with the responsibility to run it or most probably both.If you've got nothing to hide you haven't looked hard enough yet
Then you need to get out more!
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
One great thing about having this power in the hands of the police, is that the police are always people you can trust. Same with the FBI. There aren't any corrupt cops, police power is never used discretionarily to harass people the local police doesn't like (or for that matter, political enemies of the federal government). As government agencies, they also have data security second to none! Just like the DMV, no-one will be able to misuse this information!
Sounds great all around!
"Instead of posting rhetoric why don't you say what your problem with this system actually is?"
His "rhetoric" as you put it, is the same "rhetoric" the OP used to justify his support:
"This is a great idea, it would help with drunk drivers, crimes, and speeding. If you dont have anything to hide you really shouldnt be against it."
Why is it okay to "argue" like this in favor of big brother, but not flip it on it's head against big brother?
You and the rest of the pro-big brother crowd are fools. You have no concept of where this is all heading. You think governments are a bunch of selfless public servants only looking out for our good. If you didn't think such a naive stupid thing, you wouldn't argue for this.
9/11 happened, and what was the result? We passed the patriot act which would not have stopped 9/11. This is a government that views us a threat and because of that, any sane and rational person who has any love of freedom needs to recognize that they are a threat to our freedom and individual autonomy.
You want a non-rhetoric reason for why this shouldn't pass? I'll give you one, though I think the OP hit a homer with his reply... I don't want to live in a god damned police state where my every move can be tracked. It isn't because I have something to hide, it's because I'm not a fucking inmate in a prison. I haven't violated any laws that should require me to be under surveillance all the time. That's bullshit. I don't want to be under surveilance. We have better technologies to deal with car theft, drunk drivers, and speeding, that don't require putting us all under defacto surveilance.
Why aren't the other options explored? For the same reason we got the patriot act in response to 9/11, instead of secured borders... POWER.
I just read with comments set to level 1. It was alarming: many of the people in the low-ranked comments are in support of this idea. These are your fellow citizens!
If there is some sort of plan to turn Americans into a passive, watched population, it's working. People actively want to be spied upon. It makes them feel "safer."
If you, like me, think this is a step toward the loss of our valuable ideals of freedom, you sure as hell had better start speaking up. These gullible, frightened people are driving our government. We need to stop them and the only way to accomplish that is to become more politically active.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Other governments around the world have been looking at this for some time now, I know here in the UK we drivers live in fear of Her Majesties Government trying to introduce such a scheme. Further details of the UK progress of this system can be found in the BBC news article linked to below...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/3903347.stm
The ability to exercise my free will as mentioned above would be rendered impossible were the government able to watch my every move, convict me of my every 'crime.' In short, I have no fear of being called a terrorist.. at worst I could be labeled a drug addict, unfortunately that would be enough to land me in jail (no voting rights, no freedom).
I notice in this thread that everybody supporting privacy mentions doing so because of petty crimes they commit.
What's important to understand is *why* the concept of privacy is so classically important. Originally, we weren't a nation of laws, at all. Crimes were "against the people" and it was up to a jury of one's peers to decide if a crime had been committed, and if so, of what nature, and what the punishment should be.
Privacy was assumed, because you didn't commit a crime unless you injured somebody else in some way - either personally, or their property. Are you going to go to a jury and try to get them to arrest you for smoking a bit o' weed? Popping pills? Beating your horse? Where's the crime, if nobody gets hurt?
This all changed just after the Civil War, where the jury system fell flat on its face due to widespread racism, mostly in the south. How would a black fella get a fair trial in a matter involving a dispute with a white folk? Either 1) Jurors are white, in which case he'd hang for blowing snot on the boss' hankie, or 2) Jurors are black, so he gets off scott-free.
So, offenses and penalties were codified, and state constitutions all over the place were altered, introducing this new "Penal Code" that everybody was suppposed ta follow.
In this Penal Code, crimes were ratified as laws of the state, and had clear, definite actions to commit that were considered crimes, and penalties were clearly and definitely stated.
This is perhaps one of the biggest expansions of US Govt powers in its history - far, far greater than the DMCA, and the PATRIOT acts put together! It has resulted in a burgeoning swarm of laws, rules, regulations, and silly exceptions, as well as an entire horde of busy lawyers and paralegals.
Now, people worry about committing crimes without any directly hurt party, and a state busy executing its rights to your health. Introduce socialized health-care and/or health insurance, and suddenly, smoking clove ciggies costs other insured parties quite a bit of money. Now, hurting yourself DOES hurt somebody else, and there are numerous state/federal laws above and beyond the obvious.
Once laws are codified, they don't go away. It's rare that a govornment willfully reduces the laws on the books!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Aren't gas taxes basically a pay-per-use fee for motorists for infrustructure building?
Gas taxes have the advantage of being anonymous, plus they promote lower gas-usage vehicles. The only reason I can think that anybody would consider using GPS in favor of simply taxing fuel is that they want to LOWER the taxes on gas, thus prices at the pump. You lower gas prices, and you're GUARANTEED to get re-elected.
m
The initial impetus for this was alternate fuel vehicles. An electric car you plug in at home now pays no road taxes like a car at the pump. The same goes for propane or natural gas vehicles you fill at home. As vehicles go away from filling at a gas pump that collects taxes per gallon another model is needed.
Coming up with the mechanism for billing by gallon, watt, therm, amp, whatever and separating what you use in your car vs what you use in the oven isn't practical. So to assign the taxes based on use mileage ( or even "hours on the road" ) needs to be figured out. It's got to happen.
Even with an odometer, a mechanism taxing for mileage by state would be needed. Especially with the smaller states in the northeast where people live in one, work in one and transit a third to get to work each day. As long as you're figuring out which state you might as well figure out things like toll roads, bridges and time of day congestion usage.
It's going to be GPS. Anything else requires a more elaborate infrastructure.
What it doesn't have to be is privacy-hostile. Rather than uploading your entire driving history, the "road tax road map" could be uploaded into the unit in the vehicle. With the schedule of tariffs for your particular vehicle onboard, all you really need to reveal is the taxes owed. No need to reveal whether you went 1000 miles in a high-congestion area or 10,000 miles of night time interstate driving, just that you owe $5.95 in taxes. ( Expect this to be used as a by-use insurance tool as well)
There has to be a way to have drivers pay for use of the roads. Ideally we won't be limited to gasoline engines, so charging $ per gallon won't always work. An alternative is needed. Arguing about privacy impacts of a GPS receiver in the car is fine, and appropriate. But better would be to come up with a viable alternative to bill users for road use that is independent from fuel delivery.
In the field of computing, this would be called spyware. Do you want spyware?
Maybe you don't have a reason to care, but lots and lots of your fellow citizens do have reasons.
Anything like this would be likely to have security leaks. Probably big ones. So what if someone with $1000 in hand could find out where your car is right now? Let's say it's:
1. Your ex-spouse, who has a grudge, a temper, and a .44 magnum.
2. The leader of the gang whose homey was just sentenced for a robbery that you were a witness to.
3. That person you met in the bar last week who just won't leave you alone.
4. The burglary ring who's looking for people more than 500 miles from home so they can have a nice cup of tea and a sit down while they are stripping your digs.
I'm sure everyone has other examples. And, by the way, not every person in law enforcement is unfailing honest and upright. Sometimes they fit right into scenarios like those above. Or worse. Just Google ' "Ramparts Division" Scandal' for an example.
You know who the government is? You!
No it is not. The government is a bunch of rich white people who were elected by corporations. There are no "common people" in government anymore, and there have not been for quite some time. Does Tom Delay really care about the common citizen or his next big fat corporate check that he can money launder into his pocket? The government is about POWER, not about people.
The current administration has been way more blatent about their theft of government money than any previous administration. They are also less apologetic about it as well. They steal, lie and then are arrogant about it as well. In the meantime, they distract us with the Iraq War and debates about gay marriage while they plunder us.
Sure, you can believe that the government is *you*. Just try running for office one day and see how hard it is to become part of the ruling class. Unless you're a member of the skull and bones, you're never going to be accepted nor will you ever get a foot in the door. And unless you start accepting brides and become corrupted and essentially are "bought" by lobbiests and corporations who will control you forever like a puppet, you're never going to get the money to win an election.
Just where did you ever get the idea that the government was for the people, of the people and by the people? And you bought that crap? Man...
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
What's to stop the government from seizing all space as theirs, via their recently expanded eminent domain powers? Couldn't they make the case that it's in the public welfare to monitor all the space all the time? They could even 'lease' it right back to us so that everything would be as before, except the government could legally monitor you 'jacking off'.
And you care if the police know your location... why?
Because the police have been known to judge guilt by association based on a person's location. 1960s monitoring of groups with unpopular politics comes to mind, as does 1970s enemies lists.
It's easier for a government to crush dissent when it knows where the journalists are.
Try being a whistleblower on government impropriety when the government knows the location of every automobile to which you have access.
Good luck attending a meeting of the Sons of Liberty when King George has GPS tracking devices on your horses. Attention! The horse of suspected traitor REVERE, PAUL has shown up on the console as moving west from Boston. Stop and detain.
If you think the use of data from mandatory GPS units in privately-owned automobiles would be limited to collecting "user fees," you're being incredibly naive. Some well-meaning legislator would next decide that we ought to be keeping tabs on where sex offenders are going during school hours. Someone else will decide that we ought to know where people convicted of multiple DUIs are going.
Respect the temptation that power gives to well-meaning men. Respect the likelihood that given enough power, any of us would become a tyrant. Limit the power you, as a sovereign citizen, give to your fellow man.
Who said it was a public facility?
How about those of us in agriculture who drive more off public roads than on? We're supposed to pay higher fuel taxes than normal users (diesel), see higher wear and tear on our vehicles (because we actually use our trucks off road, but pay the extra taxes for those of you who don't), and pay usage fees for the roads we build and maintain?
On top of that, given the recent tendency in the US to make us fence off vernal pools (mud puddles), mandatory "resting periods" on the use of land we own (and in my family's case have lovingly maintained for over 150 years now, TYVM), restrictions on rural road maintenance, our public road-adjoining property being declared "scenic viewsheds" (so we can't change anything, including painting houses a different color)... On top of all of that, here are some of the things I expect them to use this for:
From my experience in agriculture, I can tell you that the only reasons there aren't more laws directly restricting your otherwise lawful behavior are:
The government is not your friend. My property rights may be what they're taking now, but they'll want your house to build an oil pipeline or landfill next. And to make you fence off your lawn for salamander habitat. Or create a vernal pool for fairy shrimp in your backyard. Or force you to give rightaway for a hiking trail.
And yes, they've tried all of that with my family. Wake up.
Please post your full, real name, home, school/work, and cell phone numbers, unaltered email addresses, home and school/work address, job title, vehicle descriptions and license plate numbers, and a link to a recent photograph of yourself.
Or, admit that privacy has its benefits after all.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
I was told once by a cop, that if you follow some one long enough, they will eventualy commit a trafic violation. It maybe something as minor as not using a turn signal or failing to signal within the required distance the law dictates before you turn.
With this in mind, If i had it in for you, I could always find out were you were and then cite you for enought violations you license points out and get suspended oryour insurance get so expensive you cannot affors it anymore. If i was going to do somethign like this, I would target those with different political opinions or ideas that threaten my livleyhood. Maybe i would get borred and target minorities or just church goers. Maybe even the parrents of the child that beat mine up over a game of marbles at school the previous week. How about just screwing with someone who i gave a ticket to and they got out of it because i made a mistake.
The idea of using this to make sure road use taxes are being paid is idiotic. The fact is you pay your road use taxes when you buy a gallon of gasoline. You also contibute when the vehicle is registared and when you buy tires (yes there is a DOT fee on tires hidden in the price) As for big trucks or comercial vehicles, Well this is also taken car of with IFTA reporting and regular audits. Each shipper reports thier shipments so cariors cannot fudge the report. IFTA rules regulate you pay usage on Five mile to the gallon for class eight vehicles (even if you get better milage It changes acording the the use and weight of the vehicle) and every gallong of fuel except that marked for offroad use (noted with a die in the fuel) have the tax already in place when purchased. The drivers report the miles driving in thier log book, the company reports milage in thier IFTA statemnts or routing reports and also when reporting thier income statments as well as tax deductions. The states track comercial vehicles entering and leaving states as well as different parts of the states. Fuel reciept also track were the vehicle has been and is regularly availible to inspecters (fuel card transactions).
You even pay road tax to mow your lawn in most cases. The idea that a car might be driving too much without paying is a load bull. This is just some lame excuse to invade what was normaly considerd private. The problem is more fuel eficient vehicles and alternative fuel vehicles are using less fuel or fuel that isn't being taxed. This can be easily corected by charging a higher fuel tax at the pump or increase registration fees for vehicles that get more milage. For some reason the government want to know were you are, were you were and what time you were there.
Most people will look at the conditions of the roads around them and think this is neccesary. The problem is that road use money is being diverted from the roads and used for other things. Installing these devices are not going to fix that or the roads. It is only going to cost money and allow more money to be diverted.
Are currently called gasoline taxes. I don't want (need, care for, encourage, etc.) another tax on automobiles. If more tax revenues are needed, raise the taxes as they stand. Don't involve my privacy!
I wouldn't call it rhetoric. Benjamin Franklin - They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security...
"For other stuff for the average Joe, what's the problem?"
How about: this will be used to strongarm, threaten, and oppress those of us who sue or protest the government when they break the law, overstep their authority, make egregious and preventable errors, attempt to take property which is not theirs, imprison people unjustly, etc, etc.
Which includes, as you said, people like MLK, but also the thousands of individuals and organizations who sue the local, state, and Federal governments each year.
Our Executive Branch wants to legitimize torture. Really, it shoudn't be that hard to remain paranoid these days.
I have an Irish friend who was visiting Washington D.C. He has a long (and shining) employment history with a reputable technology company within the United States and has a valid work visa. While taking pictures of landmarks in the Capitol he was detained and questioned for 72 hours.
The precendent is in place for this to become common practice. Witness spot checks for subways, full body searches for getting on an airplane, random ID checks, and now GPS units which will track you wherever you go.
You need to expand your reading a little. Have you actually read 1984? I can't believe how many people quote and borrow from Orwell without having read him.
Likewise, Solzhenitsyn. Spend this winter reading the Gulag Archipelago, and notwithstanding global warming, it will be the coldest of your life.
The ultimate lesson of the twentieth century is that governments really, really suck, and you can't be too paranoid about them. Any abuse you can imagine has been and will be committed, and most likely by your own government.
If you have nothing to hide how about the next logical step. You shouldn't have any problem with no court order reading of mail, e-mail and regular, phone taps and cameras in your house tied to the local police department. I mean it's not like you have anything to hide? It's called privacy and it's it's in the constitution, for the moment anyway. Unreasonable search and seizure means you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. I'm sick of everyone trying to give away my rights because some sleazy government official says you'll be safer if you give up just one more right. We gave up a lot for the so called Patriot Act and yet the government just got a failing grade on what has been done to avoid terrorism. Since little has been done to stop it we are at a far greater risk than before 9/11 since now we are viewed as the evil empire by much of the world including parts of Europe. Hey we didn't need those pesky rights anyway. Hey more criminals will be caught because we can trace their cars. Guess what, more innocent people will be questioned and accused because they happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. What was your car doing parked outside a murder scene at 9pm? Across the street getting ice cream, likely story. Can't happen? I got pulled over for driving past the scene of a crime. The excuse was I was driving too fast but that wasn't possible since the street was a washboard and we all had to crawl down it or trash our suspensions. It was an excuse to search and detain a vehicle. If I had happened to be parked there when it happened and they traced it I would have likely gotten a night in jail with a bright light in my face. We are over regulated and under the microscope as it is. If you use a credit card they can already tell where you had breakfast and filled the car as well as where you did your Christmas shopping and how often you bought your wife flowers. The government doesn't own us we own the goovernment and it's damn well time we reminded them of that fact.
It would be easier to understand your position if current American police policy wasn't to use speeding tickets, under the guise of safety, as a revenue generator.
If people think they are constantly being monitored they change their behaviour. Let's say there was an anti-war march, and you just wanted to go along to see what was being said, you hadn't made your mind up one way or the other, but you knew you were being monitored? That would have a chilling affect on free-association. That's what we have to worry about.
To be fair, you aren't at peace. You are fighting a War on Terror, remember ? And before that, a War on Drugs. And the Cold War, World Wars, indian wars, Civil War, more indian wars and finally Independence War. And Korean war, Vietnam war, Iraq wars...
Face it, the US is always at war against someone or something. There is no "times of Peace" for your country.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
The records created by this system could be leaked and used to character assasinate. Good men/women who might run for office or take positions of influence will instead shy away from civic duty. We'll be left with even more leaders who have no shame of their past indiscretions, or those who were able to hide in their parent's bubble of privelage for the past 40 years. We'll have www.TheSmokingGun.com x1,000. Even if records are "secure" we know that they eventually get out. Just the fear of a past indiscretion coming to light, will be enough to disuade.
Imagine: "Contential Carriage Records leaked to TheSmotkingGun reveal that Thomas Jefferson, former secretary of state and Democratic-Republican Party candidate for President of the United States took a trip to Richmond, VA last year. CCR also shows that a Jefferson slave, Sally, also took a weekend trip to Richmond, VA at that time. Hospital records reveal Sally delivered a child aproximately nine-months later. We're working to get survillance tapes from the hotel! Check back in five minutes!"
I keep hearing that it isn't time to shoot the bastards.. yet. When is it time? Soon no real resistance will be possible as you and your fellows are under surveillance 24/7 and everything you do and say is monitored. You think you have nothing to hide? How about from Pat Robertson and the religious right? How about from the war on some drugs? How about those who are too interested in telling you what you can read or view or who you can have sex with and in what manner? How about from the thought police comming soon? How about from those who want to limit what you can do even on your own computer and over the net to what locks you in to their meager offerings and makes you there cash cow in perpetuity? Such means increase the power of those who would more fully control you. As long as those in power are no fully committed to freedom and have their own agendas we are not safe when applications like this literally come down the pike.
RAISE HELL about this folks! Do it while some of our public "servants" will still deign to listen. All too soon they won't have to.
Why should I care if they know what I buy or where I drive?
What happens if the tracking shows that you were near a terrorist bombing... and the tracking also shows you were at the garden centre buying fertiliser. Maybe you weren't guilty, but with enough tracking there may well be plenty of "evidence" that makes you look guilty. And since the law enforcement authorities seem to be able to get away with *anything* at the mention of the "T" word you could well find yourself banged up in jail even though there's no solid evidence against you.
This is my problem with national databases - given enough data, innocent parties can look guilty. I.e. contrary to popular belief, DNA and fingerprints are *not* necessarilly unique - looking at the fingerprints of a small number of people who are already suspected of a crime is one thing, but given a database of *everyone's* finger prints I worry that innocent people will be dragged through the courts (and possibly convicted) purely because the database showed a match.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
To those who would support such a travisty I can only remind them of the words of one of our founding fathers.
"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase
a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
This thread sees a surprising number of people supporting this idea using the “if you’ve got nothing to hide, why should you worry?” fallacy. There have been weak arguments on both sides, but I would like to nail this one shut by reminding everyone that tracking citizens is distinctly unconstitutional. Maybe some of you have read the following provision in United States law.
(Emphasis mine.) Sure, I know this is a little quaint, but hear me out. This law, known as the First Amendment, among other things, protects the right (note it does not grant a right—rights cannot be granted, only protected) of citizens to associate freely and anonymously. The reason it protects this right is so members of the population can either meet up for Thursday night poker, or overthrow the government. Shock and dismay I’m sure, but that is why we have it (and the Second Amendment). Oppressive governments, as a first order of business in controlling a population, restrict the ability of people to assemble. The First Amendment restricts our government’s ability to do that. Of course, it applies directly to protecting to a much simpler, less severe act of “petition the government for a redress of grievances”. Tracking people with GPS everywhere they go will have a chilling effect on the desire to exercise this right, regardless of the intent. Like everything else, people can gather to do something positive or commit a crime. Take guns for example. Not intrinsically bad, but used both for sharp-shooting sports and killing innocent people. Should they be taken away? Absolutely not and the same applies with our freedom to go wherever we choose without being monitored. It is astonishing to me that we live in an age where people are willing to allow the government to track and monitor their every move. These people should be utterly ashamed of themselves because this a freedom that has been won by great sacrifice and is one of the founding principles of the United States. Too bad we really don’t teach this material in schools anymore.
Join Tor today!
One.. I already have this..
I'm an amateur radio operator and I have a GPS and packet transmitter in my car. If you pull up my website (not the one linked above) you can see where my car is currently, how fast I'm going, and where I've been in the last 7 days!.... oooooooooooooooo
Now.. this is a little different... and a few things come to mind... am I going to have to take my car to some place to have this installed? What happens if it breaks? Do I have to spend my time getting it fixed? How do I know if it broke?
From the article:
Some GPS trackers constantly communicate their location back to the state DMV, while others record the location information for later retrieval. (In the Oregon pilot project, it's beamed out wirelessly when the driver pulls into a gas station.)
On the Oregon one... why can't I just fill up my jug of gas, while the car is parked in a parking spot and then transfer it over to the car, thereby avoiding the uplink. If it's constant communication seems like a low level RF signal by the car could block it out.
However, one has the right to be secure in there person and property, so devices like this cannot be required to be installed in ones' home without a court order.
And no one would EVER dream of changing the law so as to require the installation of cameras in your home, right? I mean, our government representatives are the GOOD GUYS. Aren't they?
Answer me this --- Just who would be in charge of monitoring this data? Would it be farmed out to some corporation, who could serve advertisements? Or maybe a terrorist/serial killer/psychopath could get access to this data and track his targets. Yeah. The possibilities are endless. This is a bad, bad, bad idea.
Here in America, we have something called the "burden of proof." Because of this principle, the government cannot restrict our rights until it has been proven that we have done something wrong. Because I have a Constitutional right to privacy, according to the United States Supreme Court, I will allow this sort of police-state only over my cold, dead body, and so should you.
Unless, of course, the "utopiae" in fiction such as Brazil and 1984 appeal to you.
Many Bothans died to bring you this sig.
You're assuming that they won't apply the same technology to bikes and charge you, too! Granted, probably a lesser fee but why would we think they'll exempt bikes?
Anyway, I oppose this across the board. The privacy concerns are obvious. But fee-based infrastructure is a really bad idea. National infrastructure is one of the few things that I agree the government should be involved in because it benefits all of us.
If they eventually go fee-based then I assume they'll cut the federal budget by whatever it is they currently spend on the transporation department, at least the hundreds of billions they regularly spend on highways? I'm definitely not going to put up with being double-dinged for this stuff.
Simply not following the law is not sufficient. Jaywalk in front of a traffic officer; bring a bag of pot to the police station. Civil Disobedience is not about sneaking around, trying to get away with an infraction of law. Civil Disobedience is about commiting the infraction in full view of society and then, within the context of the criminal justice system, showing how unjust either the law or the punishment is and persuading society to change the law. You must be willing to stand against dogs and firehoses. You must be willing to risk life, limb, and liberty. You must be eloquent and respectful - otherwise you're just a juvenile deliquent running across the street, screwing up traffic, in order to score some 3rd rate ditch weed.
There is no reset button in life; however, there are bonus levels.
Fuel taxes are almost perfect as road user fees. Larger, heavier vehicles tear up the roads more, and also happen to use more fuel. If pollution is considered, the model holds up there well too.
High fuel taxes encourage people to use less fuel, and to buy more fuel efficient vehicles -- perhaps from other than (SUV heavy) US carmakers. But if road use were taxed by mileage, fuel use would be less affected, as would vehicle choice WRT fuel efficiency. SUV makers and oil companies would benefit. So they love this. And yes, it's partly their lobbyists and think tanks who are behind it.
Also, who do you think would be making the GPS units? Delco, perhaps? Hey, if you can't compete for consumer business effectively, go for the gov't contracts...