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."
This just means my car will get a tin foil hat, too...
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. This would definetly be great for the police who are trying to track a stolen car or track down someone who has just murdered someone. The possibilities are limitless.
Seriously. People need to start seriously questioning the goverment's authority. This stuff is getting out of hand and it's going to get worse if people remain complacent.
I don't want to spend the rest of my life
Looking at the barrel of an Armalite
I don't want to spend the rest of my days
Keeping out of trouble like the soldiers say
I don't want to spend my time in Hell
Looking at the walls of a prison cell
I don't ever wanna play the part
Of a statistic on a government chart
Here
SealBeater
-- Its survival of the fittest...and we got the fucking guns!!!
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.
Maybe, they plan implementing it like the proposed plans for England and Germany which uses GPS to charge per mile road usage?
The Canadian anti-speeding technology has been completely misrepresented.
1 81251
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170150&cid=14
use their $sys$gpscloak.
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.
I thought criminals we're supposed to be one revolution ahead of the law.
:/
Guess not
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)
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.
Well I can't think of anything bad about it.
they did mention the information being subpoenaed, which is quite possible and would have similar results.
What sort of civil matters can it be subponaed in?
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...
I'm sorry as great as this would be for road planning, we have horrible, congested roads where I live, and other important and completely valid projects. I just have trust issues with the local, federal, and state governments. I don't want to put more of my rights within their immediate control. Whether or not they actually act on their newfound abilities doesn't really matter. What matters to me is that if I had a GPS in my car and they were actively tracking me there is the POTENTIAL for abuse. As I said, I don't want to give a group of governments I do not trust the tools they need to infringe upon my rights down the road.
Brothels are legal throughout much of Nevada. They make decent money and pay taxes, and mostly keep the girls clean. But there are a lot of people that would rather this not become available to someone randomly wandering through the database.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
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.
"What sort of civil matters can it be subponaed in?"
From TFA: "No rule prohibits that massive database of GPS trails from being subpoenaed by curious divorce attorneys..."
Satisfied?
And hence it would be easily challenged and shot down in the courts. In the case mentioned, West Virginia would be charging for your activities in Virginia and DC, which is a violation of the Interstate Commerce clause.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
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!
I work on cryptography and information theory, I read Bruce Schneier, I have secure passwords and am suspicious of everything. I dabble in paranoia, read things like Free Culture and 2600, and am generally anti-The-Man.
That said, sometimes I can't really remember why I care if someone is gathering information on me. Sure, if a company or government monitors my browsing habits or watches where I drive, they can make ads targeted or develop a psychological profile, but what's the real downside? Why should I care if they know what I buy or where I drive? Sure, if I were running for office, it might help with a smear campaign, but other than that, what does it matter? And that's really the only example that comes to mind sometimes, Hoover threatening to release tapes of MLK having sex. But at that point, they're focusing on you as a public figure and breaking the law to gather particularly embarrassing information. For other stuff for the average Joe, what's the problem?
I'm sure everyone has examples. Remind me why I care if they're gathering databases on where we drive or what we do or who we are.
Seriously, remind me why I need privacy. I forget sometimes.
xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
My phone has a setting for its GPS ability to toggle location tracking either always on or 911 only. I guess they could be secretly tracking me anyway, but I doubt it.
[insert witty quote here]
So, if Oregon institutes this usage tax, and I'm a long-haul trucker with my truck registered in california, yet I do a regular Corvalis-> Sand Diego run, am I charged for the 85% of miles spent in California? How about people comutting across state lines? What about multi-use vehicles? I know a couple of orchardists who put over 7K a year on trucks driving on their PRIVATE land, and maybe 5K on public roads. Do they get taxed the same way?
Also, any halfwit which a Haynes manual can roll back (or forward) an odometer. These things are supposed to be tamper-resistant too. My friend once had a Chevy with 548,000 miles on it...just as a joke. He reset it to something reasonable when inspection time rolled around...
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
Then you need to get out more!
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
The government pushes economy cars until they happen. Then gas tax revenue drops or its growth slows. Every spending politicians impose a new tax so they can do more stupid stuff with our money. Bah, Humbug!
Profanity - The sign of a small mind trying to express itself.
Well yeah, that should be ammended (or, y'know. YA COULD just stop cheating on your wife). The police having information so they can enforce the laws is one thing, my wife knowing I'm sleeping behind or back, or my insurance company knowing I'm drink-driving is quite another (okay, despite my sarcastic comments, yes I do think that anyone but the law enforcement agencies having access is bad).
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!
Meant to read: " So, if Oregon institutes this usage tax, and I'm a long-haul trucker with my truck registered in oregon,"
sorry
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
Unless plan on buying pre-2002 tires for the rest of your life, you are already being tracked by RFID'ish tags. This was put into law a while ago, tire manufacturers don't publicize it: http://www.underreported.com/modules.php?op=modloa d&name=News&file=article&sid=702
"Well yeah, that should be ammended..."
My thoughts exactly, it is not right in its current state.
Yeah, who the hell flushed the toilet twice at city hall yesterday??? Oops... it's the mayor.
If the whole point is to track the mileage that people use and levy the taxes based on the mileage one drives, you don't need GPS to do so... everyone has to have a registration, an inspection sticker, etc... So why not get the mileage from the car when you renew it? I'm sure there are a small (relatively of course) number of people that drive interstate often and would not have their mileage correctly applied to the correct state, but it should even it self out... To me this sounds like a really bad idea under the guise of "fairness"...
I am root, fear me
thing is, they already do this-- it's called the fuel tax. The only benefit the GPS solution has over the fuel tax is that big brother gets to track your every move.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
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
That's called taxation without representation.
Here where I live they have what they call the "Robin Hood Law"
What it does is rob tax money from wealthy towns, cities and counties to fund schools in poorer counties. Like where I live, it's a small but wealthy town. They take tax money from the people here to fund the schools in a much larger poverty city a few miles away. The schools in this town receive less income from the local tax payers than the schools in the poverty city one over.
Because of that, the schools here suffer, repairs are not done, books are not bought, needed people are not hired.
It's completely unfair to the people here. Why should we have to pay for the ills of another city? It's not our problem that the city is in such a terrible state. Let them take care of their own problems and leave us to take care of ours.
I've heard that the Supreme Court ruled that the Robin Hood Law was illegal but I haven't seen it in print yet. If so, our tax dollars will go where they belong, in our schools for our kids.
No taxation without representation.
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.
Simple: Because they can! If they can, they will. That's essential human nature.
Profanity - The sign of a small mind trying to express itself.
'mileage-based road user fees' aare already in place. They're the 40-60 cents per gallon tax for fuel. The more you use, the more you pay. There are also toll roads which continue to collect tolls well after the project has been completely reimbursed. This is just more bs tax.
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
I'd be stoked--just the sort of thing I'd like to tamper with/disable.
Would you mind if plainclothes police officers followed you everywhere you went, for no particular reason than that you might commit a crime somewhere?
It's an extremely rare person who has never broken a law in his life. Never once jaywalked, went a mile/km an hour over the speed limit, passed on the right, changed lanes a little too soon after the last one, dropped a piece of paper and watched as it fluttered away out of reach...
If they police want to catch me doing something, then they can put eyes on me, not a GPS. If I see lights in my mirror, I'll pull over. If I see a government-sanctioned GPS on my car, then it will get blocked. It's their problem to figure out how -- especially since they'll need eyes on it to do so.
For that matter, cops will often look the other way on minor things. Someone going 5mph over the speed limit on the freeway is probably not going to get stopped. Someone parked just slightly outside of the lines is likely to get leeway. And if it was an honest mistake, the person might just get a warning instead of a citation. Automated systems do not allow for judgement calls that might take into account mitigating factors.
Cops have a rough life. One of my high school classmates is a cop. I grew up down the street from a SWAT officer, who had to retire after a leg wound from a gunfight with a suspect left him unable to run quickly enough. I admire what they do, and I defer to them. I don't argue the issue, and I treat them honestly and with respect. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to spill my entire life to them.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
That's a fairly poor way to ration roads. You ought to pay according to traffic load; driving on rural roads shouldn't cost as much as driving on urban throughways. GPS is fantastic for tracking positions of cars and trucks for this kind of thing. Such a carrot-and-stick approach to traffic distribution would go a long ways toward improving allocation of our public roads.
Such a void as this must, must abound with signification.
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?
The jurisdiction I live in has HUGE taxes on gasoline. So yeah, you're right.
We already have a very effective user-pay program in place without GPS. The license and registration fees paid each year are _nothing_ compared to the non-stop user fees paid when filling up.
The more I drive, the more I pay. - If the gas taxes were being used for highway safety or maintenance rather than going into general revenue, I'd feel a little less screwed by the whole process...
http://request-header.info
most states require older cars to pass at the levels from when those cars were new.
grandfathering.. look it up..
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
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.
Just because it has some potentially useful features does not mean that the invasion of privacy is worth it. OnStar works just fine to notify someone that you've broken down, and it provides location without being on all the time, or providing this to law enforcement. AFAIK, it's only available in the US and Canada, but could be rolled out elsewhere.
If you could check her position, what are the chances that I could? If you have a car I want, I might be able to wait until it's at a mall parking lot during a heavy shopping season, and then disable the GPS and run it to a chop-shop. You're out a car and your privacy. Or maybe I wait until she's in a darker location. Then you're out a car, your privacy, and your wife.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
if my residence is in California.
and I spend a month in New York
and order something over the internet from Illinois.
California wants it's use tax.
Interstate Commerce applies to Commerce, not Taxation.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
If you buy all your gas in Virginia and drive to DC every day, they are taxing your activities in both, effectively.
If I buy a car in VA, I'm a resident of VA, and I park the car all year in Georgia, I still pay the car tax here.
I think a commerce clause objection could be defended against, since they already charge for the mere fact that you own a car. Scaling that tax based on mileage, I don't see how that changes the authority to levy the tax, it's still the same tax.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Mr. T GPS any day!
/. article, but it got rejected(different news site than msnbc though, but I can't find the site I used right now)...ah groussing!
Of course, I submitted that as a
Monstar L
...we fix the speed/traffic laws we have first? How bout we fix the road systems so the speed limits are relavant?
Living in southern California, this would go over really well (hi sarcasm!), considering the average speed on our interstates here is about 10 over posted, with a significant portion of drivers as much as 20 over the posted limit (posted in most areas is 65, traffic moves at 75 to 80 in most areas of the 5, 15 and 8, except when they are overly congested).
Personally Ive wondered for a long time why cars dont have some sort of login mechanism, maybe a swipe of your license or something...that a police officer could then access when seeing you in traffic. Why? So that we could have skill based enforcement/graduated limits. A good driver who have X experience and scores X rating on a test at the dmv should be able to drive faster than a driver with a history of accidents/problems...use of lanes could be restricted accordingly, with the far left lane reserved for the highest rated drivers...at least selective enforcement would follow some logic, as it is now, Ive been ticketed twice in the last 3 years for going the same speed (or slower) as every car around me. One of the incidents the officer passed me on the left, then slowed to pace my speed....what the hell is that?
Additional factors for license ratings...the vehicle...a big ass suv should not be permited to travel the same maximum speed as a sports car or even a compact car...you say those big suv's are safe at 65, i say ok, but my car is safe at 90, with the same (or shorter) stopping distance as your escalade from 65.
So if you are a top level driver in a top level car, you get the highest limit, though that speed should be restricted to the far left lane (or multiple left lanes on wider freeways), weaving and other unsafe behavior would still be a violation and should be punished/enforced seriously.
anyway...lets fix whats already broken before we spend money on other crap that has huge potential to invade the privacy of good citizens.
If the state and federal governments are going to put tracking devices in our cars in order to have us pay up for our roads, we might as well privatize them. That would save the state and federal governments a lot of money, since they don't have to deal with the funding of roads at all. I, for one, would rather pay a toll to use a road and pay a private corporation for upkeep of the road than to have the government forcibly install tracking devices in my car. Tracking devices installed by governments installed on your property are evil (who gave the government the right to track your car?), and whoever thought of this horrible idea should read Nineteen Eighty-Four and see what this can lead to.
I'm not a strong advocate of road privatization (even with my libertarian views on most issues, I believe that good, interstate roads are essential to a federal government, and the states should maintain their own network of roads; cities and counties, too, not to mention road networks fall under natural monopolies). However, if the government wants to invade our privacy for the name of maintaining roads, then I feel that the roads should be taken away from the government and be sold to private corporations. If they can't even ethically fund the roads, why should they be able to maintain them?
Let's just hope that they don't through with this tracking crap, though.
Imagine you have a reason, any reason (not illegal, but you still don't want to tell your wife, maybe it's about a birthday present), to come home late a few times. Instead of asking where you've been your wife checks your GPS and realizes you've stopped by one address all the time. She gets a hunch you might be "seeing" another woman and decides to quietly check you up from now on. Surprise you're still going there (Building that grand new thingamob she's always wanted does take a while even when your buddy from work, who is an expert, is helping)! A few weeks later, she's convinced that you show aberrant behavior too (Pschology is a real bummer sometimes). One day you come home to find the divorce on the floor.
... PLEASE learn to spot the difference." But then I'd prefer you'd accept that there are a) different opinions on where exactly to draw the line, and b) legal things you could want to do without everyone knowing you are.
I won't go into any "distrusting the government" reasons here, but, you see, from my POV there are very real problems with such tech, so I'm tempted to answer: "There's invasion of privacy, and there's useful technology
"But it's convenient" is decidedly not a good reason for anything, it's just being to lazy to look for a real one.
Taxes are there for this very reason, and are indexed for this very reason. There are many people living in such places who are as bright, cluey and intelligent as you and me, but they're stuck there through circumstances over which they have NO control.
This means it's my job, and it's your job, to help provide what ever we can for them, and make their life just a little better. Don't ever begrudge the opportunity you have to help someone out because one day, you'll need a hand too.
For such a selfish post, you are hereby fined 1% of this weeks income from all sources, to be paid to the charity of your choice in that neighbour city. (Alternately, you can take the 'community service' option and go and talk to some of the people who live there, get to know them.)
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.
This case dealt with a cell phone as the technology used to track, so what. The technology used is irrelevant. A person is being tracked without a warrant, that's illegal.
or this http://www.mapamobile.com/
or this http://www.verilocation.com/
or this http://www.wayhey.com/
What are you listening to? (http://megamanic.blogetery.com/)
Actually, no. I'd prefer not to. I prefer to primarily tax people according to their income for the roads we all use. But secondarily, I'd prefer to tax people FOR THE ROADS THEY PERSONALLY USE. In your case, you're buying petrol for your ute which includes 'road tax' for roads you don't use, but taxing you for the roads/tracks you BUILD. Surely this will HELP you by only taxing you for when you actually USE a public road?
I already pay "mileage-based road user fees," it's the tax placed on every gallon of gasoline. The government gets enough money to do build roads, repair roads, and then some.
I live in one of the few states with a toll highway (PA and it's crappy turnpike) and it sucks in all ways possible. I live in Europe part time, with the highest gas-taxes AND tolls. And it sucks.
This is not straightforward but double taxation (probably an opaque way to pay for more non-related crap) and a way to track you, no less. The millions of dollars spent on this are already a waste of money.
To the parent poster and the government, fuck off.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20051115tech01
I'm with Sprint, and for over 3 years have had to manually turn off my location beacon - you know, the one that's active by default just in case I'm in an emergency and the authorities, i.e., e-911 need to locate me.
Get your Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool Here for FREE! - http://fedora.redhat.com
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!
Odometers can be run back a bit if you want.
Would you want to bet that if such a thing would be even considered in Congress/Sejm/Parliament/Duma/etc, the first act you'd see would be making electronic government-certified odometers mandatory; with each one costing $250+?
It's just like the case with cash registers. We even have a law in Poland that says you're not allowed to access your fiscal cash register by network -- each computer that's capable of printing invoices has to have its separate register attached directly. Guess who lobbied for this.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Just because it's not in the Constitution doesn't mean it's not protected. Remember, the Constitution grants the government certain, limited powers. It does not enumerate the rights of Citizens. See the 9th Amendment. In fact, if the power is not expressly enumerated in the Constitution, the federal government expressly does not have said power. That power is reserved for the States and the People. See the 10th Amendment.
And finally, for the learning impaired (not the parent), rights are not granted by the Constitution. They are protected. Rights are inalienable in the American way of thinking. At least, back when we Americans thought about such things.
http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html
No it's not good enough. If you live on a farm, you do a LOT of driving that isn't on public roads, but you're still paying 'gas tax' the same as a city commuter who uses them exclusively. Seems fairer to charge you for the roads you actually travel on
this is sadly the way of the future. in time, you will come to accept it. until then, feel free to argue it, and fight it. but in the end, they will win, and this kind of thing WILL be common. yes, a cell phone can be tracked while it is powered on, even the non gps variants if the tracker is so determined. but it indeed does have to be powered on. as far as using gps to track my driving habbits, and then charge me... well, thats a mighty interesting phrack article... you can bet it will only be a short while before someone figures out an easy, and simple manner of implementing it, and selling it ala radar detectors. and once they are used to us jamming our signals, they will indeed begin pulling us over for not reporting. and then we will find a simple and easy way to spoof another vehicles ID... the game continues... i recall an argument once that the use of radar, or lasers to determine your speed as being unconstitutional, and implicitly evil. of course now, well, it is common place.
Which is exactly why farmers get special gas tax rebates. This is especially true for farm diesel fuel, which has been dyed a certain color to prevent usage in non-farm equipment.
Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
Privacy issues aside, the problem with this concept is the technological limitations inherent to the system.
Sounds like a cute idea, but I wouldnt put my money on this thing going anywhere.
I only mod funny =D
Nonsense. Just for a single extremely obvious possibility, consider a cop deciding to track (and blackmail) people who park at/near a gay bar, strip club, etc. Many perfectly legal actions are still open to being misinterpreted, abused, etc.
The constitution was written to bar unreasonable search and seizure -- and that most certainly does bar placing people under surveillance without reasonable cause to believe they have in the past, are currently, or soon will be involved in the commission of a crime.
The constitution was written that way for a very good reason: because a system that lacks such a guarantee is extremely open to all manner of abuse.
For one more example, this would also be extraordinarily open to racial profiling -- there are already pretty clearly documented instances of people being stopped for driving where cops thought they didn't belong simply because of the color of their skin. Right now it happens more or less by accident, but a system that tracked where people are driving would make it quite trivial to turn such accidents into a widely enforced (even if unofficial) policy.
A system such as this would be open to far more abuses than legitimate uses. The ostensible reason for it is almost entirely nonsense anyway. Fuel taxes already pay for highways on a pay-per-use basis, and do so much more accurately than a system that was based primarily or exclusively on mileage traveled. Fuel usage correlates much more closely with highway wear than simple mileage could even hope for.
--
The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
The feeling here is we don't want law dictating morality down to the T. We have enough problems as it is with the law carving our collective rights and wrongs. Lawsuits are thrown about like a ticker tape parade in the US. Not to mention the great potential of abuse, what with things like the Patriot Act still around.
Here are some possible negative effects:
If you don't break the law, chances are they won't even want to bother watching you. And if you do break the law, you can't really complain.
Redistribution of wealth is not what taxes are for. Taxes are used to pay for essential government services, such as military, Interstate highways, and other essential federal services. States and communities may add more things to the mix, such as schools, health care, parks, state- and locally-owned roads, and other community services. Taxation is not supposed to be an engine for egalitarian redistribution. It can work, but this form of equality does eventually end up destroying liberty.
If people want to donate money to help poor people, then they should do that voluntarily. Compassion is when you do things from your heart. Compassion and empathy is needed in a society in order to survive. But it should never be enforced by law. It's not compassion when the government is telling you what to do with your money. It's not compassion when your community's tax dollars for their schools are being siphoned off to another community's, and your schools are left to rot because you're not in a low enough income bracket. It's not compassion; it's theft.
Because when I took photos of a hit and run in front of my home, and the police refused to even take a report, I went to the city mayor. The city mayor had a police officer call me and threaten me. If the police are going to murder me over a hit and run cover-up, I don't want it made extra easy by letting them know when I happen to be in a sparsely populated part of the city.
"Toll roads would be more efficient -- in particular, less congested -- if they could follow the same model and charge virtually nothing in the middle of the night but high prices during rush hour."
I already have an incentive to drive off-peak hours; I don't enjoy sitting in traffic. If that pain doesn't affect my schedule, the fees won't either.
Higher costs don't make people change their plans. Look at all the owners of big cars and SUVs stopping at the name-brand gas stations and paying inflated prices, instead of driving smaller cars and shopping for lower gas prices.
As for tracking stolen cars, Mexico is just a couple of hours from my home, and my car could be long gone before I would get a report filed, so the "free LoJack effect" probably wouldn't be of any value to me.
OK, if they got this fully in place, I suppose we could revert to privately owned roads. The Man would just run a collection service and allocate the fees to me when someone cuts through my property.
Our computers at some point will charge us every time we turn around: forget GPS in the cars, they'll be implanting it under our skin at birth so we can never get lost or kidnapped, can never sneak into the movie for free, will not leave town if the sheriff tells us not to, and so the government will know everybody we associate with. Security is a Good Thing.
A lot of American values are centered on individuality and self determination. You may find that Americans are a little more resistant to this kind of thing, just as we support the right to bear arms -- it's not just for hunting, folks, it's to give politicians and potential invaders something to think about, and it has worked historically.
Authority will always be abused, and if there is a central database of all your comings and goings, someone with a Big Brother complex will find a way to use this information to your disadvantage. Read 1984; "they" are really quite a bit behind schedule, but the water is getting continually warmer and the frog shows no sign of jumping.
Hey, if they make the GPS thing mandatory I'll just live with it and probably enjoy some benefits. But I'd much prefer that they use an anonymous technique, and those techniques already exist.
The GPS thing could in fact be made anonymous, if it were designed right. Prepay for your mileage at a gas station, and transfer the balance into your car's computer. But I doubt The Suits would accept a loss of trackability.
England was once the home of freedom, till it became a tyrant. America was once the home of freedom till it became a tyrant. Methinks I will drive my car to the nearest place to purchase fake ID, then cash my credit cards and other traceables in for engraved pictures of Paul Kruger, Pandas, and Maple Leafs, then bide my time as an unknown ex-pat on some beach. When Freedom returns, call me, I will be under the 2nd palm tree on the left.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
Although there are some pros to surveillance, I don't consider the commonly stated, "If you don't do anything wrong, you got nothing to hide," a valid one. Just because a person is doing things 100% legal doesn't mean there is nothing a person wants to hide. As long as there is prejudice and malice in the world, people will want privacy for many things.
One example for the car tracking would be to get tracked going to some hentai store. This could be completely legal, but could cause problems if the information leaked out and you depend on seemingly unrelated decisions made by those that look down upon such things. Or even if there are no noticeable effects, maybe you are just shy about it and wish to do what you can to minimize those that know about it.
You mentioned somewhere about how the government is made of us... and that is exactly why I would fear it getting too much power over such things. It is a government of people, and people make mistakes or are sometimes malicious. At least requiring a warrant or judge's approval helps introduce extra eyes and ears into the process to stop one person from having too much power. But with things like information, it can be kind of dangerous since one mistake in a potentially very large system can let loose a flood of problems, e.g. a security mistake in the computer system letting someone get a bunch of data for many people.
Probably someone with that information would not notice what you do unless they were looking for you in particular, but many people don't want to take that risk. An extreme example would be to have collars installed on everyone that could kill them instantly with a command from the police (not really surveillance but same ideas). It would help resolve hostage and terrorist situations, but it also means trusting that there is no way for a malicious person to hit the button for your collar, for a police officer in the heat of a hostage situation to push the wrong one, or for the thing to just malfunction.
So it kind of comes down to trust in a way. I'm not saying that we can't trust people with any information and there should be no surveillance. The risks for a given process and type of information just need to be weighed against what is to gain. (E.g. that collar above would not get used very often, and would probably be pretty risky, where tracking of people's cars might not have as severe of a mistake and may help with things more often, but it comes down to how much people value their privacy, which can be a lot).
So putting lives at risk, harming your body, and funding gangs and terrorists and etc is the American SPRIT of Freedom????
If you wish to speak idealistically, the PEOPLE aren't going to want you doing that... Thus the PEOPLE aren't going to allow you to ejoy this fond "freedom" behind bars...
Now more realistically, think about what "PEOPLE" are actually actively involved...
Clean up your act dude. I'm not saying its "unAmerican" to jay-walk, but you are doing several things, each of which could potentially have extremely serious consequences (besides the law).
The fact that you freely admitted to what you've been doing and freely admitted that you are doing so with the full knowledge that it is wrong, and you are doing this without posting as AC speaks volumes...
One other thing... If it is considered "American" to break a few small laws, then it is only fair to allow companies and law-enforcement to do the same... So its okay if a politican takes a little kickback in exchange for his hard work... Its okay if a governor hands a huge project to his best buddy without a public bidding process.
Whether or not these things occur today is irrevelant, if you allow these to be "occasionally" performed. How "often" must these acts occur before things get too bad? How many drinks before driving? How large a kickback for a politician? How much will you allow a biomedical company to get away with, for YOUR medication???
Yes, the US has a lot of laws... But your "justification" is a slipperly slope to chaos...
(Unless you believe that *some* people are so special that the laws don't apply to them)
TOP SECRET FACT:Most modern cars have tracking transponders ALREADY!
:
:
: ...but the shocking link finally died in July 2004 and the new location 2005 does not have a photo of a RFID bridge underpass RFID database collector. But this 20005 link below does discuss their toll booth RFID tracking uses...
Spy transmission chips embedded in tires that can be read REMOTELY while driving.
A secret initiative exists to track all funnel-points on interstates and US borders for car tire ID transponders (RFID chips embedded in the tire).
Yup. My brother works on them (since 2001).
The us gov T.R.E.A.D. act (which passed) made it illegal to sell new passenger cars lacking untamperable RFID in the tires allowing efficient scanning of moving cars.
Your tires have a passive coil with 64 to 128 bit serial number emitter in them! (AIAG B-11 ADC v3.0) . A particular frequency energizes it enough so that a receiver can read its little ROM. A ROM which in essence is your GUID for your TIRE. Multiple tires do not confuse the readers. Its almost identical to all "FastPass" "SpeedPass" technologies you see on gasoline keychain dongles and commuter windshield sticker-chips. The US gov has secretly started using these chips to track people.
Its kind of like FBI "Taggants" in fertilizer and "Taggants" in Gasoline and Bullets, and Blackpowder. But these car tire transponder Ids are meant to actively track and trace movement of your car.
Taggant chemical research papers
http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/byteserv.prl/ ~ota/disk3/1980/8017/801705.PDF
(remove spaces in url from slashcode if needed)
I am not making this up. Melt down a high end Firestone, or Bridgestone tire and go through the bits near the rim (sometimes at base of tread) and you will locate the transmitter (similar to 'grain of rice' pet ids and Mobile SpeedPass, but not as high tech as the tollbooth based units). Sokymat LOGI 160, and Sokymat LOGI 120 transponder buttons are just SOME of the transponders found in modern high end car tires. The AIAG B-11 Tire tracking standard is now implemented for all 3rd party transponder manufactures [covered below].
It is for QA and to prevent fraud and "car theft", but the US Customs service uses it in Canada to detect people who swap license plates on cars when doing a transport of contraband on a mule vehicle that normally has not logged enough hours across the border. The customs service and FBI do not yet talk about this, and are starting using it soon.
Photos of tracking chips before molded deep into tires!
http://www.sokymat.com/index.php?id=94
PLEASE LOOK AT THAT LINK : Its the same shocking tire material I have been trying to tell people about since the spring of 2001 on slashdot.
a controversial dead older link was at http://www.sokymat.com/sp/applications/tireid.html
(slashdot ruins links, so you will have to remove the ASCII space it insertes usually into any of my urls to get to the shocking info and photos on the enbedded LOGI 160 chips that the us gov scans when you cross mexican and canadian borders.)
You never heard of it either because nobody moderates on slashdot anymore and this is probably +0 still. It has also never appeared in print before and is very secret.
Californias Fastpass is being upgraded to scan ALL responding car tires in future years upcoming. I-75 may get them next in rural funnel points in Ohio.
The photo of the secret high speed overpass prototype WAS at
http://www.tadiran-telematics.com/products6.html
http://www.telematics-wireless.com/site/index1.php
Suppose I'm the mayor and i have a plan for some redistricting or rezoning to give access to one of my contributors. You appose the plan because it would lower your property values and place a chemical plant in your backyard. You gain support from other in the comunity. I can track you and then instruct the police ot follow you and your supporters long enough to find you violate some acain ordnance or trafic violation. Then after enough tickets, your licens get revoked and your ability to organize get seriously hampered.
Lets suppose i am the chief of police, I want a raise but the city won't allocate enough funds. I decide to look at these logs and determine you drive alot. Knowing that almost everyone will make some mistake at some point in thier driving, i have my officers follow you and others that drive alot or even those that don't drive too much at all. Eventualy you violate some minor trafic ordinance and you recieve a citation. I tally up all these citations ans say we need more money then i get my raise. Maybe even use this to get new equiptment or justify hiring my best freinds.
I mean you made a trafic mistake and you deserve to be punished right. Sure so thats out of the way, just the reaosn why you were followed remains. I guess we would never know why you were followed. I could always say that the data form your GPS logs showed you were a risky driver but you would have to take my word for it.
Suppose i looked at the GPS logs and determined you were a dangerous driver and instructed my officers to follow you and cite you for anything possible to get your loicense revoked. Later it turnes out you GPS device was malfunctioning and thats the reason you apear to be speeding across town only to turnaround and zipp back. Or because you live or work next to a bar, we thought you were an alcoholic because your car is always parked at the bar. Could i use this data to get a warent to search your house for drug related offenses when it is parked next to a crack house that got busted last week? even when it was because your girlfriend lives three houses down? i wouldn't know that, just that you might have been at the crack house.
There are all kinds of reasons to not like this idea. If you able to accept all those scenarios then i guess you get what you deserve. I'm not able to accept any of them. I'm possitive one of them will happen and nothign could be done about it./
I agree, it is silly to think that Americans are going to go along with having to pay more tax based on how much we drive. We're already paying enough on gasoline, who's brainiac who thinks we are going to be willing to pay even more based on the amount we drive? The other question is, if these measurements suddenly show a large segment of the population has been overpaying, will we get a refund or a reduction in tax. :P I know, wishful thinking, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander. ;)
As far as the conspiracy theorists who think this is going to violate your privacy need to calm down. Even if this were to be come a common place device on all cars, you will be mearly a blip on some screen or in a computer in a large cloud of other blips. That hardly means that Big Brother is going to be staring into your life or mind 24hrs a day. You are going to have to do something to really standout in order for any law enforcement agency to take notice of your blip.
If the purpose of this system is to tax the public based on miles of highway driving then why does the system need to report the vehicles position back at all? It would seem a simpler system would be to simply have the installed device use GPS to see if the vehicle is on the highway and keep a count of the miles driven. You could then report the annual mileage total when the vehicle gets a smog check or is due for registration renewal. The highway tax could even be added to the registration renewal fee.
No need to keep detailed records of time and position at all. The state gets its tax dollars and no one needs fear being "watched" from above. Not to mention the enormous reduction in complexity involved in actually monitoring every vehicle all the time.
While I agree with the general gist of what you say, I must take exception to the specifics.
The jury system before the civil war was heavily biased against blacks in the same way it was immediately afterwards: They did not serve in significant numbers.
While I realize that this does not take away from your point, it is an important thing to note; racism was, and is, alive and well in our country; and no amount of law will change that.
A blog about stuff.
Your slippery slope argument is lame. You are assuming the laws he is breaking are just and thus should be followed.
Look here and tell me scociety will fail because a one arm piano player is charging cover in Iowa.
So putting lives at risk, harming your body, and funding gangs and terrorists and etc is the American SPRIT of Freedom????
Oh, so it's not ok for people to 'harm their body'? Let me know when cigarettes are banned.
Funding gangs and terrorists? Maybe if there wasn't an arbitrary list of substances that people were not allowed to buy legitimately, there wouldn't be a black market. Put some responsibility on the ones who feel the need to push their values on others.
Seriously, do you think that everyone who smokes a joint belongs in jail? We already have the world's highest documented prison population rate, thanks in part to people who think that way.
In Re: orchardists
I would assume they will get the same exemtion that agriculture/farms get now.
that or the stat will be able to tell from the GPS record that they mainly rode on their own land.
note: I am completely against this whole idea, only pointing out how they would get around they most immediate concerns.
A blog about stuff.
Interesting enough, some people have done this already for personal use.
Check out www.aprs.net/ old engineers with too much free time on their hands have converted their mobile ham radios and old gps receivers into a wireless tracking system that feeds into the internet through repeater/gateways. Their system costs a few hundred bucks per vehicle/person to setup and requires an amature radio license, which is probably cheep compared to whatever the transportation department is 'considering'.
My connection with aprs is kind of unusual. I worked with a team to put one of these gps trackers on a weather balloon to track atmospheric turbulence data. The aprs system that is already in place will respond to certain radio packet formats and log them for a period of time on the web. So all we had to do to collect our data (we stored real data in the comment section of the packet) was head home and log onto their website.
The problem is what i need to do to stand out. I'm not aware of any laws regulating what situations require a search warent or what the police to just access. What if i was questioning the presidents political beliefs, could osme over zealous partyline officer or official start harrasing me? What if i am campaining to get some law repealed like the patriot act? could this information help those wanting to keep it?
What if someone dies, was found in an area I visited recently (for other reasons than killing someone), was stabed with a common kitchen knife that i happen to have one of, and the estimated time of death was around the time i was in the are? Am i going to get blamed for the death? How about when it was a relationship gone bad were some lover that rides a bike and has the same kitchen knives, found out they were being cheated on and went crazy. What about if it ws my girlfriend trying to frame me and kills some other girl i was fooling around with? she walked ot the area because she knew i would be on business there and stabed someone to make it look like it was me?
The possibilities could be endless but what frightens me most is the idea of political reprecusions for free speech. It could be anyhting from voting no on a tax levy someone in power supports to fighting to get jaywalking laws overturned. What would it take to make the blip on the radar become somethign to be watched?
Even if some of his points weren't the best, I know I would personally loathe the idea of having somebody constantly watching me. I don't do bad things. I hate being watched. If I'm left to my own devices, I'm going to remain an upstanding citizen. And who says that this tech won't be exploited by people worse than the government? Like the afore mentioned terrorists. Maybe they would scope an area they wanted to attack, find someone who drives a car they can easily buy somewhere else and trick the GPS into thinking that it is their neighbor's car. Then they go wild, shoot up the neighborhood, blow up a bank, whatever. While the cops are busy investigating the neighbors, the real terrorists make a clean break and run for the hills.
The question of "right" vs "wrong" requires a moral or ethical judgment on a topic, which is unrelated to the question of "legal" vs "illegal". I think it is obvious that the poster doesn't feel he is doing anything wrong in these illegal actions.
One other thing... If it is considered "American" to break a few small laws, then it is only fair to allow companies and law-enforcement to do the same... So its okay if a politican takes a little kickback in exchange for his hard work... Its okay if a governor hands a huge project to his best buddy without a public bidding process.
Moral issues, once again. Or perhaps ethics. There is a considerable overlap between ethics, morals, and law, but that doesn't mean they are equivalent.
Does anyone consider that there are state taxes on gasoline and diesel that help to cover the cost of the highway maintainance? Those who burn more gas will pay more tax. Typically those burning more gas are either using a heavier vehicle, or driving more miles.....sounds like they already charge those who use the highways more than those who barely use them.....why do we need GPS to do this? Not to mention that the large trucks on the road pay additional highway use taxes.
Curious about Storage and Virtualization? Check out
Unfortunately a lot of the abusive tactics of the DMV are created by ordinary bureaucrats not by legislators. At least the legislator traditionally has to worry about public anger. Remember when you could go to the DMV without an appointment? They actually had to attend to you? How about when you could explain that your vehicle was not being operated and you did not owe them any money for it. Now you have to inform them ahead of time that it is no longer in service, and you have to pay to do them this favor! Thousands of people wind up paying the DMV for *not* using their roads. And what about the price of tickets, when were those prices snuck through. Who figured out that $50 isn't enough deterrent for speeding or not wearing your seat belt? Why the fuck is not wearing your seat belt an offence at all!
;-)
They'll charge you whatever they want, they'll penalize you whetever they want if you're late, and in my state they can just go in without prior notice and take it out of your bank account. I think those DMV people must assume that the unwashed hordes that they see their building every day is representative of the public at large (it's frightening to visit that place isn't it?), or maybe they just see us as one big bank account that can always be tapped for a little more.
I don't take this proposal too seriously, because I don't think people will stand for it, but I'm sad for the lost millions that I will later being paying back to the government. If it ever does go public, expect mass civil disobediance. And with a car-mounted GPS jammer, I will enlist more people to my cause
Happy driving. It's a priviledge, not a right, you know. Don't get too uppity about it.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
I drive kind of recklessly, I never repair my vehicle, and I don't believe in traffic laws.
Of course, most of all - I don't drive all that often. A rented truck every now and then to move the loot... ehrm... I mean legally aquired goods without receipts... Anyways, why would tracking of my vehicle change the way I drive? If I didn't find a way to disable it I would simply live with it. If I needed some... ehrm.. privacy... for moving the dead bodies out of the kitchen... I guess I would use public transportation, "borrow" another car or just encase the gps-tracker-thingie in lead.
Bottom line... I fail to see how it would affect the way I drive.
Sure, they say that people will choose less congested times for their transportation if it would cost them more to drive during rush hour, but thats bs. Most people drive during rush hour because thats the time they need to get somewhere. The people who don't care about when they drive are probably on vacation.
Blech... oh well, not like it will affect me really... not for many years. It just once more makes me thankful I don't live in the states.
Why would you want any pesky provisions in place to stop tracking without a court order? That wouldn't be very useful now would it? These damn liberals seem to think that law enforcement agencies can just dilly-dally around waiting for 'judges' to let them just find out where a car is (and has been for the last 3 months).
The scary thing is, people are so used to hearing about 'government tracking devices' from crack-pots, if you even mention the word 9 out of 10 times the person you're talking to will immediately think "oh there goes another one, just nod and smile". When we finally do get government tracking devices people will either not believe it or just shrug and say "i thought so all along - you mean they only _just_ started tracking us?"
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Has no one read TFA? The idea is not simply mileage, you can achieve that just with taxing gasoline, and encourage fuel efficiency at the same time; but to charge different rates depending on congestion; e.g. if you go into othe city in rush hour, you pay more than if you go in at 3 am, or if you go on a trip on a rural backroad. At least then those who can reschedule their trips have an incentive to do so.
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.
What the hell?! What are you talking about? You do realise countries have had Legal Codes for far, far longer than the United States even existed. Even before the civil war, the US and many other legal systems were already a quagmire of often contridictory laws beset with loopholes.
I don't know where you're getting these ideas from. Especially given that rasicim in juries is still a problem even today. The current US legal system has less to do with the civil war than it has to do with simple human nature and society. See legal and socal history, economics, and most of the rest of the Guide.
May the Maths Be with you!
I like the idea of mileage based road taxing. It means that that people who use the roads pay for them. I very strongly disagree that GPS tracking it the right way to solve this particular problem. It's just far to open to abuse and a high tech solution to a very low tech problem. Every car has a odometer why not just read that once a year to get the milage. This is a complete no brainer. I don't know what it's like in the US but over here in the UK (the government have mooted the use of a similar system here) all cars have to pass an MOT once a year (new cars are exempt for 3 years). Why not just make reporting the mileage part of that? The first three years could be estimated or self reporting or some such. Yes you would get people that "clock" the car but you'll also get people that cover up the GPS reciever. Clocking is already an offence so just up the punishment a bit to provide a bit more of a disincentive. I'm sure you could also convince a few people to have GPS trackers fitted so that you could profile the population and spot people that are fiddling the system.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
I value my privacy. Not because I break the law and not because I don't think some supreme body should not be watching me but because a Government that is made up of regular people just like you and I shouldn't have that kind of over reaching power over us. Has everyone forgotten this???? I read the posts here and am scared for the first time about the views of many Slashdotters. Never thought I'd see the day.
A government is for the people by the people. Do you remember the intrusiveness of the Nazi regime and the USSR??? This is part of what we detest when looking back at these societies. Sloly but surely even the Land of the free is coming around.... Give the people the illusion of choice and they will follow like sheep I guess
To address the other issue raised here there are legitimate concerns about highway taxes but there acceptable solutions outlined in other posts that don't involve tracking every citizen that drives a car.
Give them the illusion of choice and they will blindly follow for they choose not to make one.
As long as anyone who doesn't have insurance or money to pay for the hospital is left to die when they don't wear a seat belt, I'll agree to not requiring them to wear one.
Oh, and if you don't have enough insurance or money to cover all medical bills, you're thrown out the second your cash runs out.
I don't think tickets are the best way to handle that, but they're better than nothing and I don't know what a better idea would be.
No matter how much you respect the police now, if you can't guarantee that they will still be worthy of that respect after the next generation of recruits (or the one after that, etc) is in the system, then giving them powers that are difficult to remove is not a good idea.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
You'll solve the orange cone season by lowering the voting age. The reason the U.S. has a uniform voting age of 21 is because the U.S. Department of Transportation won't give a state highway funds unless it conforms. Louisiana was the last holdout, and even they folded - and 18 year olds drinking at mardi gras was a major income for them.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
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.
It will be used to spy on people. Case in point, Germany recently introduced motorway tolls for trucks. The toll collection system is GPS based. In order to soothe public opinion, a law was voted ("Autobahnmautgesetz") that specifically forbids the use of the toll information for purposed unrelated to toll.
However, recently a truck was involved in a gruesome runaway accident. This was enough of an excuse for parliament to consider changing the law.
All these systems initially come with a guarantee that they won't be used to invade privacy. However, once a suitably moving event happens, that event will be abused to sway the public opinion and abolish the privacy guarantees.
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.
On British roads, I'm prepared to bet that you could even use existing infrastructure - the inductions loops fitted in roads as traffic-light pickups would probably make fine antennae for the RFID tags.
I'm sure that I can't be the only person to come to this obvious conclusion, which is why I'm doubtful about the motivation for this scheme ; if it's just about road charging and congestion reduction, then the RFID method achieves these aims at substantially lower cost. The only limitation it has is coverage :- you are limited to tracking the movement of vehicles on roads with RFID pickups. If your scheme is to charge for movement on busy roads to reduce congestion, then you only need coverage for those roads.
Employing Ockhams' Razor ; the UK govermnent must want 100% coverage, if they are prepared to spend so much extra to get it. Since 100% coverage is not required to fulfill their stated aims, and a cheaper solution exists which would achieve their stated goals, their actual goals must be different from those stated. The obvious goal that 100% tracking coverage satisfies is the automated surveillance of their citizens movements.
They want to track us all, and they are lying about it. That strikes me as deeply sinister.
Because the legal system has, and always will be, hijacked for the benefit of those with money/power.
....just....dont....care. And recalling them is no help - they've had time to get bribes from lobbyists/whoever, made their connections, and can live happily thereafter. That's no punishment. So, until the day that actual accountability exists, crying "change the laws" is pointless.
Proposals such as this "collect road toll" are nothing more than thinly veiled excuses presented by Homeland Security to spy on American citizens. It's not that the DHS will "eventually use it" - it *is* a DHS proposal. The only creative bit is how do you phrase it in an acceptable way to sell it to people first, and then escalate it as a security device afterwards.
I am certain the DOT has no interest in this matter as a "toll issue". Nowhere in law is there anything that says that people ought to pay for roads proportional to how much they use them. If this rationale held up, I should be able to avoid paying school tax because I have no children going to school.
I find it funny how people like the parent always bleat about "well, the law is the law", somehow managing to ignore 200 years of political corruption. That a bunch of political flacks in DC managed to go through the formal motions of putting the law in place doesn't mean we should enshrine the product of the movement of their political bowels as "Law" (though I admit, it'll get enforced as such). People like the parent always say "try changing the law". I believe that that criticism will become valid only when politicians are held accountable for the laws they pass.
Accountability for passed laws is actually something that doesn't exist. Consider: if Congress passes a law that is struck down as unconstitutional, then the politicians were trying to sneak by something that is technically illegal. Is anyone held accountable? Is any restitution paid to people who suffered under this unjust law? Of course not!
There's an even bigger problem - by most accounts, most Senators/Congressmen don't read the actual bills they sign into law. Supposedly, most lawmakers did not read the Patriot Act when it was signed. Wasn't that a wonderful little cherry the American people got. Frankly, the only job of the lawmakers is to create good laws. Not reading the proposals to me represents criminal negligence of the worst possible sort - these people are literally playing with people's lives, for the police/DHS will certainly use any bad law to its fullest extent.
Without any sort of accountability, trying to change laws is basically a semi-futile endeavor, because the very people you are appealing to for help
America is heavily overburdened with laws. When we have the expectation that "Everyone is guilty of Something", then everyone is a criminal. This basically destroys any respect anyone has for the law. Consider - the modern attitude toward law is not "I am a good person for obeying the law. I am proud to obey the law because the law is just". The current attitude is more like "Today I didn't get caught doing anything wrong. Stupid f*cking politicians". Honestly, do you know *anyone* who is proud to be a law-abiding citizen. Not because of punishment. Not because of fear. Out of a genuine respect for "The Law"? Anyone? I don't, myself. People aren't stupid - they know most of the current law is bullshit. The part that's not bullshit is drowned in the lake of steaming excrement. In these conditions, enforcement must come out of fear, not out of a moral commitment to justice. And once you deal in fear, any attempt at being reasonable is doomed to failure - e.g. like your proposal to "change the law"
Similar tracking systems (Mode S transponders) exist for planes, but they are not in widespread use and are unlikely to be in widespread use in the near future, because they are so expensive. You can take off VFR in a light plane in many parts of the US, and no one will see you or track you (there are great swathes of the US without even radar coverage, like most of the western US below about 12,000 ft).
Even where you have radar coverage, VFR traffic is only tracked if the pilot voluntarily calls up and asks for flight following (except for certain types of airspace).
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
I think you are talking out your ass to create evidence for an opinion you hold which just isn't true. You say that money is taken to fund schools in other counties? Since when did school taxes move above the local level? My original home is nassau, new york... and none of our school taxes go to poor schools in nyc which is right next door.
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!"
Not really. We all know that the government is just looking for a new source of revenue. Think about it. As you already mentioned, we pay at the pump, and the DMV and when we buy new tires. Don't forget that we also pay local taxes, part of which are supposed to be used for upkeep of the local roads. You can bet that NONE of those taxes would go away if a per mile tax was instituted. The real goal is just to milk the taxpayers for even more money in a way that they would have trouble arguing against. Personally, I think implementation of this idea would be very dangerous for whatever government mandates it. At the very least, whatever political party was in force would most likely find themselves looking for work at the next election. And at the worst, the normally peaceful privacy advocates would stop being so peaceful.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
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.
Many years ago, (probably before you were born :-) when cell phones were first introduced, batteries would only last from 1 - 6 days before being run down.
What you don't realize is that the phone is always transmitting a signal, just to let the cell phone network know where you are. Not as in your physical location, but which cell tower you are closest to. This takes power, and is one of the primary uses of the power.
Try going to a location where there is no cell phone service, and see how quickly your battery will run down. The weaker the signal from the cell tower(s), the more power the phone will put out in an attempt to contact a tower.
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
We Rush fans have been preparing for this since 1981 (Ok, technically, we've been preparing for the Big Brother scenario since 1976).
Seriously though, I have a 1968 Ford Galaxie, and my daily driver is a 95 Honda. I only buy used cars (it's the value proposition). I wonder if they'll try to require some sort of retro-fitting on older cars. I'm not sure, but I think the massive steel body of the '68 may be a faraday cage anyway
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
How about instead we overthrow this tyrannical government which is every daily finding new ways to impliment its tyranny and inflict a control grid upon us?
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
"Why shouldn't those who use a public facility more be also forced to pay more?"
Careful with that argument; its a slippery slope. You can make the same argument about public schools.
But all that aside, a gasoline tax does accomplish what you're suggesting:
1) The more you travel, the more gas you burn, the more you pay
2) It accomplishes what I think is a good social goal, and that is, the less efficient your transport, the more you're taxed
3) It's easy to administer. It requires no contact with the "end user", you simply count the gas as its put into the tank and tax it.
4) There is no ability to governments to track my movements. The government has no power nor reason to track my movements.
GPS on the other hand will be technically complex, easy to circumvent, a nightmare to administer (I can see armies of 1,000's set up to administer), has huge privacy implications and in the end will not raise any more money than could be accomplished by:
*DRUM ROLL*
Raising the gas tax.
When you think of it though, I think they're trying to do two things:
1) Tax us twice for travel... once for the gas, and again for miles travelled.
2) As is usual for large governments, they want the ability to track people easily.
Both of these are BAD GOALS. I can't believe people will support this.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Not using violence of course... :)
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
Seat belt laws actually keep the driver behind the wheel, rather than thrown out of one's seat or hard to one side. Often in an accident a driver can prevent an accident from becoming even worse by steering, braking, etc. after the initial contact. Consider seat belt laws to be like laws requiring you to maintain your brakes, brake lights, etc. It's for the safety of other drivers, not you.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
The wise Alex Jones has been reporting on this for years: http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/toll_roads_tex as_set_to_supersize_highway.htm
New York Commuting? Fuhgettaboutit! $4 to cross the GW Bridge or Lincoln Tunnel with EZPass ($6 if paying by cash). A friend of mine is a toll collector at the GW Bridge and told me he collects around $8000 per shift.
I understand part of the problem is that because New Jersey is small, you can drive across the state in no time. Many cars on the turnpike are from other parts of the Northeast simply passing through the state. When you don't buy gas in NJ they don't get any tax revenue. The only way to get this revenue to fix the roads is by charging a toll. I think they should do away with the tolls and just charge all the hundreds of thousands of large trucks that drive on the turnpike every day a HUGE road use fee (they're the ones damaging the roads and bridges, right?) On the other hand, I've heard rumors that a big percentage of toll revenue for the Parkway, Turnpike, and all NY bridges goes to the toll collectors' and turnpike/parkway workers' pension fund.
Why is the government wasting money trying to figure out how to track people? Most places already have this figured out. Have you ever heard of EZPass? It's a little transponder tag that mounts inside your windshield (RFID!!!) to pay your tolls. I'm the tinfoil hat type, but this little thing saves me from waiting 15 minutes in the cash lanes. The private toll roads in Southern California (and the fast lane on the 91 freeway in Corona) use FastTrack, which is just like EZPass. I know San Francisco has something similar as well for the Golden Gate Bridge.
Did a bit of research on this--as a bicycle commuter, I often have to hear flak about "what right do you have on the road? You don't pay gas tax." It might be of interest.
The gas tax tends to pay more for larger roads--interstates and major highways. The majority of the cost for normal residential streets and country roads (the sorts of streets you see bicycles on, or, for that matter, most people do day-to-day driving) are not covered by the gas tax. These are typically covered by various municipal and state taxes (sales tax, income tax, property tax, etc.). The percentage varies from community to community, but the gas tax contribution ranges from about a quarter to a third of the infrastructure cost.
My point? I'm not entirely sure. Mostly just to give everyone a sense of scale.
I hear you. I'm keeping my vintage Volvo 240 running for as long as I can, and should I have to replace it, it's going to be with a pre-OBD-II, pre-big-brother, pre-Vetronix-readable-black-box machine.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
At no time, ever, is the location of a commercial aircraft unknown. Sure, private small planes flying VFR no one really cares about. But all commercial planes (the vast majority of all traffic) are being tracked to the meter...
Sincerely, The FBI
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
And those who can't reschedule for some reason, get soaked.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
Usage fees are a form of double taxation that get passed down to you the consumer. Historically usage fees for roads (tolls) exceed the cost of construction and maintenance and are widely considered one of the most abused forms of taxation (right below gambling). The City of Houston (where I am from) regularly borrows money from METRO (the folks that own the toll roads). METRO has such a large annual surplus that it covers a lot of deficit spending by the city. I already pay usage taxes in the form of sales tax and of course I also pay income tax. I also pay a host of telecom taxes, city services taxes, gas taxes etc... There are a lot of good commercial uses for location based services like making trucking routes more efficient and lowering the costs of goods and services. Why would anyone support (or even worse elect) someone determined to levy yet another tax.
I'm gonna love seeing my insurance rates go down when they see that my car spends 99.99% of its time sitting in my garage. Now, all I need to do is rig up an AC adapter to power that new GPS chip I yanked from the car and the savings will start rolling in!
If they are going to charge you for the milage shouldn't they also take into account the size of vehicle being driven. A huge SUV will cause much more wear and tear on the road than a mini.
Do you honestly believe that it's MY responsibility to provide for others that aren't as well off as I am??
Show me where in the Constitution and/or the Bill of Rights it says that..
Does the pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness include MY INCOME that I WORKED FOR and that I EARNED?? Did these disadvantaged people come out and help me do my work, did they do their part to earn a part of my paycheck? I think not.
LOCAL taxes are supposed to take care of LOCAL issues. That's what was being discussed in the OP. It had nothing to do with federal taxes..
No matter who imposes the taxes they still have no right to take MY money and GIVE it to someone else simply because they are worse off than I am.
The welfare system promotes and propgates a society of people addicted to welfare. It rewards them for staying in the system. The reward is "get paid for not working". There is no incentive to break out of that system and better oneself or position in life because it's much easier to do nothing and remain in the system and get paid to do so.
It's a BAD concept that needs to be done away with. Doing away with such nonsense systems will improve *everyone's* lot in life.
Communism failed in Soviet Russia, it's failing in Red China, it's an utter failure in Cuba. The concept of "From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need" may be the passphrase of the day but in the end it fails.
Respectfully,
The FBI
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
And I think you meant back when Americans thought.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
Mileage based user fees? Couldn't they simply read the odometer during the annual or biannual safety and emissions inspection? Why do they need to track you via GPS to assess a road use fee?
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
That's the dumbest reason I have ever heard for invading my privacy. If you have been hit hard enough to knock you out of the car, I GUARANTEE that you are not in control of yourself, never mind the vehicle, seatbelt or no seatbelt. I can buy that seatbelts will save lives in such situations, but please don't insult people with that kind of mindless prattle.
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!
A certain amount of distrust for the Government is a good thing. People who completely trust and blindly follow the government, any government, are a bit scary to me.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
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.
It's called "The Robin Hood Law" and it's a fact of life in Texas.
They take LOCAL property tax dollars from Town A and GIVE it to Town B.
Town A suffers so that Town B can have more.
In this case, where I live, a town of about 12,000 people are totally supporting the school system of a town next door of 80,000 through local property taxes.
The local property taxes here are much higher than they should be because not only do the people in this town have to pay for the schools and city services of this town, they have to pay for the school system in the other town.
Why? Because the other town is extremely poor. There are NO jobs there, there are NO businesses there, there is no work for anyone because EVERYTHING shutdown and moved out. Why? Where did they move to? I don't know but it wasn't to our town here. So the other town has a 60% or higher unemployment rate and it's spiraling downward out of control, poverty begats poverty. It's sad but it's fact.
They are saying now that if they strike down the Robin Hood Law that those schools will have to shut down. What then? Send them to our schools?
Our schools can't hand that many people, no way, not to mention the distance is too far. Where will they get the money? Most likely the federal government will take it from people and give it to them. Bad idea but probably is what will happen.
What would be the best thing? That the people that live there get off their butts and revitalize the area, reopen the closed businesses and become masters of their own destinies rather than subservient slaves to a "no can win" system.
And you care if the police know your location... why?
You make the fatal assumption that everyone who works for the police, is law abiding themselves, and that the information will remain ONLY in the hands of the police. In a perfect world, tracking everyone and then using that information to solve crimes, is the perfect solution, BUT the potential for mis-use is too big.
Never trust anyone, apart from those who trust you.
.sigs are for losers
Yes, they can in the US. It was all done very quietly, but I know some inside men, and all the new mobile phones in the US can be whached by the big bad state. I know because I know of the guys selling the kit to the phone companys to do it, and that was over 2 yrs ago now. nobody is safe from it (except if you use a GPS blocker). I think my idea for a fradey cage in my bedroom with a mesh of about 4/5 of an inch (or 2cm for us brits and non imperial people), as they are going to put up a phone mast outside my house and my mum didn't tell me... well, it should stop the GPS now as well!
Exactly.
It's a very noticeable difference. I don't get a good signal, for instance, in my current bedroom, so my phone runs down quite fast. Back home, I get a good signal, and it lasts several weeks. In the mountains, it barely manages a week.
Since I have not read the article, I will spout my opinion as fact, and leave the rest to the jury :-)
I have nearly 10 years of relatively high mileage driving under my belt with a very clean driving record. Its not spotless which is my point. I feel there should be some credit or recognition for distance I have driven, and not just the number of years I have been driving. The person who rarely gets behind the wheel is more of a danger then one who has a lot of current experience.
The problem is there is no way to report the number of miles / kilometers I have driven in the past year. While I hate the idea of being spied upon, maybe this will lead to some form of usage based experience credits vs just time based.
I'm in my right mind and I have the answer to everything!
At some point 1 billion Chinese or 1 billion Indians (Or both) are going to decide they all want cars too. At that point no matter how much they pump the Arab countries just won't be able to keep up with the demand and the happy happy supply and demand game will heat up. One of the reasons cited by big oil for the current prices was that China was starting to want more gas too, so it seems like it's already starting.
We've been taking our lifestyle for granted for a long time now. I wouldn't be surprised if a huge change became necessary within my lifetime.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Even if true, they only know that some tyre ID was read by some scanner. They still need to match a particular tyre to a particular car and from that to a particular owner.
It could very well be just used for traffic management or toll systems.
There is still a long way to go from there to know where a particular car is at some point in time.
increase registration fees for vehicles that get more milage
Yes, because penalising people for buying mroe environmentally friendly cars is a great idea...
Other than that, I agree with you about increasing fuel tax (which correctly penalises those who have less efficient cars). GPS tracking is a waste of time since it would cost a reasonable amount to put the infrastructure in place and doesn't do anything to discourage the use of inefficient vehicles.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Someone parked just slightly outside of the lines is likely to get leeway.
You don't live in London obviously :-)
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
You're assuming that there can't be a technology which is both usefull sometimes and an invasion of privacy other times. These aren't always either/or issues, those seem to be getting rarer and rarer. Why do you assume that the autmobile club will be able to see your tracker, or that you will be able to see your wifes tracker. If they can, so could I with a little bit of work. It opens up so many possiblities.
Klein bottle for rent - inquire within.
This isn't new - LoJack has probably been selling information to the feds for years.
Tracking people without a warrant might be illegal, but what's keeping people from doing it in the first place? If an ex-spouse wants to murder the other for cheating and they hide a GPS transmitter under the hood so they can find him/her, it's certainly illegal but the act has been committed anyway.
Besides, I'm sure that Congress [in its current membership] can find a way to maneuver around the courts and prevent such a device from being considered "tracking."
Um..., why not just use toll booths?
This erosion of privacy is getting ridiculous.
Would you want to bet that if such a thing would be even considered in Congress/Sejm/Parliament/Duma/etc, the first act you'd see would be making electronic government-certified odometers mandatory; with each one costing $250+?
Most odometers are already made to be tamper resistant, and it is illegal to tamper with it. In addition to that, here in Canada it is the law that all repair shops (even oil change shops) have to record your VIN (the vehicle's GUID of sorts) and odometer reading on every visit. I don't know if it goes to some master database, but presumably it is used to catch odometer tamperers.
The purpose here, of course, is that a lot of people foolishly pin most of their auto valuation on the odometer, so it is an area of fraud.
They're taxing your purchase of gasoline in Virginia, which is allowed. Your registration is based on where you claim the primary location of the car, which is a single state and so also allowed. My late uncle split his time between Oregon and Arizona, and had a car in each location. He paid registrations separately.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
There are plenty of laws on the books at the federal and state level that were palatable only because the difficulty in enforcing them eases their impact on society.
There's never been such thing as 100% compliance with any law. The case could be made that 100% effective enforcement of laws would have a negative effect on the nation. Much progress occurs technologically and economically before it occurs legally.
Consider speed limits--they are now up to 70mph on some highways. But it wasn't that long ago that 70mph was considered suicidally fast for the average driver. Technological advances made safe driving at such high speed possible. But it was years of data showing that people can drive safely at such speeds that convinced governments to up the speed limit. But with 100% speed limit enforcement, those years of data would never have been collected and we'd likely all still be driving 50mph to get everywhere
And just think of the economic impact of everything you've ever bought getting there 15% slower than it does now. That's a big hit on the throughput of our economy
Every time I read stories like this one I think we're coming closer to the problem Frank Herbert outlines in "Whipping Star"--a government that becomes so efficient and effective that it is actually damaging to the nation it governs. Will we need an official Bureau of Sabotage one day to create the buffer that society needs from its laws?
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Luckily for you, Volvos are legendary in their longevity
I wonder though, if there's a simple list out there of all automobiles with a "black box" - I can't find an organized, easy to read list on Google yet, but here's a list of all the supported car models carrying Vehtronics boxes (and the box locations)... and the OEM database for On Board Diagnostics (looks to be very complete). Oh, and some info on pre-1995 models.
Post back if you come across a better listing !
Thanks.
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
It's the price you pay for being an inconvenience to the rest of us... They are giving you a financial incentive to change..
-everphilski-
Since most of the DMV worker are a part of the unwashed horde, I think they just see us as one big bank account. The individual workers themselves probably get their jollies off of screwing with people's lives.
BTW, can they really access your bank account like that? I would have my doubts about it since I think under federal laws (which supercede state laws) they would need a court order (IANALawyer). If it is true, what state do you live in (so I can avoid it)?
Similar to the upcoming US election results
New York would want its use tax. California would have a weak claim for it at best. A few years ago, California charged $300 for out-of-state vehicles brought into the state when people moved here to compensate for the different smog equipment. It was declared an unconstitutional violation of the Interstate Commerce clause, because it was effectively levying a tax against an out-of-state purchase.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Perhaps not as they are currently implemented, but it may not be too hard to do. If you have an automated system that detects all speeding infringements, then they can be programmed to only trigger (ie send you a fine) after a certain number of infringements has happened (weighted by their seriousness, and perhaps normalized by the average weekly mileage of that vehicle). This has the advantage that it is far less arbitrary than being pulled over by a cop who is randomly pissed off and wants to take it out on someone. It also excludes the usual /. argument of "but what if i'm trying to get someone to hospital quickly".
A safety belt is a simple and effective piece of the auto safety puzzle. Much like a bumper, you could declare having to use one violates your freedoms (as would doors, windows, anything else), the the value has been proven so effective that the general public seems to agree its worth requiring both in terms of safety and insurance costs.
When I cause an auto accident, which, as we are all human, can happen from time to time, rather than you being somewhat injured and my insurance paying for a $2,000 Dr. visit, now you've been dismembered all over the highway and I have to pay a $2,000,000 bill. In other words, wearing your seatbelt isn't just a personal matter like how you wear your hair, or what music you listen to. Your seatbelt choices now dramatically impact other peoples lives. Now you of course will say "But it's YOUR fault.", and yes that is the case, but as previously stated, we are all humans and some accidents happen regardless. It's just a matter of not making every accident unnecessarily severe because a little piece of fabric (or a bumper) somehow stifles your "rights".
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!
If it ever does go public, expect mass civil disobediance.
:)
>No, all that I'll expect is fuckwits like you getting better acquainted
>with public transport.
And with a car-mounted GPS jammer, I will enlist more people to my cause
>You'll be on the side of the road trying to lie your way out of another
>ticket not three minutes after the GPS signal stops. Good luck with that.
I understand the anti-GPS sentiments. And I have no doubt that there will be hacks to disable any government installed system hours after it comes out. And I'll be one of them working on it, fuckwit or not.
I do obey traffic laws. But I'm not going to be tracked around like a tagged animal by the government nor will I willingly pay extra taxes, on top of my gas taxes, registration taxes, property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, etc. We already pay the government a premium just to own a car, even without driving it.
btw, some localities require all vehicles be at least registered if not insured, whether they are driven or not, rendering your tarp idea techically illegal in those areas.
props to gh
jeeze, it seems that my fellow babyboomers that are now in charge have convoluted the call of "revolution for the hell of it" into taxation for the hell of it. i'm sorta disapointed.
Serenity now, insanity later.
... to keep riding my bicycle.
e.g. if you go into othe city in rush hour, you pay more than if you go in at 3 am, or if you go on a trip on a rural backroad.
Geez, talk about adding insult to injury. Not only do you have to put up with getting stuck in traffic, but you have to pay more for the pleasure of it?
It is not hard to set up a simple spreadsheet to look at different models and pretty much any power over two for the weight produces very interesting damage numbers for large trucks. If the truck is carrying ten times the weight of my car (a rather light truck, actually) it should be contributing $10,000 to highway maintenance for every $1 I am.
Attempts in some states to assess trucks user fees that would be more equitable have been stopped quite effectively by the trucker's lobby.
So, the next truck you pass (or that passes you), remember just how much you are subsidizing it.
This is way too over-the-top for me to believe this guy is anything other than a troll, read the end: "
4 out of 5 times this post was rapidly modded to -1 by fbi shills angry at the epson ink info and tire info and explosives taggant info and only one time did it survive the FBI negative modding Slashdot accounts and remain at +2 by the next day. If you like to read RFID facts like this that I BROKE FIRST IN SPRING OF 2001 here on Slashdot, then keep this vital post from getting modded to -1 by idiots that cannot follow links or perform searches for themselves."
Come on, FBI shills? I can't believe this got moderated up, this is bad even by Slashdot's standards. You should be ashamed!
In case you actually bother to look up anything he mentioneds, like the TREAD Act, you'll note there is no conspiracy. The TREAD act is about Tire Safety and Accountability for defective/bad tires, it has nothing to do with tracking or RFID.
These things are coming down from the Federal level. In Texas they have a similar project planned, except its going to install RFID like transmitters on the license plates even though the people of Texas overwhelmingly voted against it. They know it will be used not only to turn all roads into toll roads, but to track them and to issue tickets for speeding and other offenses. No one wants this stuff. So ask yourself, why is it being implimented? The Federal money, and Federal power trip is driving this thing.
...of Mexico! Our own Federal Emergency Management Agency is building clandestine camps with which it plans to imprison us. They are so brazen that they even talk of shadow government openly. Was the PATRIOT ACT not enough for you to show you its true nature? I ask you, does this beast now resemble in any way the servant we created as guarantor of our rights?
When this country was founded we made a pact to form a federal government that would basically exist for the national defense, and as a device to guarantee our rights. It has far far exceeded its purpose, and is now in the business of funding tracking grids on the populace, locking people up indefinitely without charge council or trial, rendering people to foreign lands to be tortured, making wars of aggression on sovreign nations, stealing property through imminent domain & other means of seizure, entering us into global trade organizations that rob us of our sovreignty as a free people. It has tried to turn the rights we hold dear in every measure into privileges -- the right of free travel (licensed and taxed..turned to privilege), ownership of property, right to bare arms, our personal sovreignty - it even tries to claim ownership of our children. There is not an area of our life, nor of our God given sacred freedoms upon which it has not encroached. It has even turned over the right to coin money to a private (for profit) corporation. Run us into ruinous debt, more debt generated by this administration that in all of our prior history as a nation combined.
Instead of the Federal government being servant of the people and the sovreign states, it has tried to make us the servant of the Federal government at every turn. It has sold us down the river and is trying to turn us into slaves. Slaves that need permission for basic human rights at every turn. To be tracked, tagged, taxed, chipped, spied upon, injected, herded like cattle to no end. At this very moment this venomous demon we have unleashed is plotting to end our country and merge us with Mexico & Canada - they even have a new currency set and ready to go "The Amero". The federal government has even failed to secure our own borders, the very purpose it was founded for! - Our border patrol agents are now guarding the southern border
This beast has gotten out of hand, it has reached the level of intolerability and its far time we reign it in. It should never have gotten the power to tax, we should have added meaningful penalties to the Constitution for violating it - and perhaps that is where we went wrong. This 'experiment' has failed, by every measure it has failed for the purpose we have created it. Its time to rid our lands of this beast, and recall the federal government and start over again. We need a complete reorganization of our government. Its time for a new constitutional convention where we redraft this document aware of the reality of the mistakes that were made. Aware that the checks on the Federal government were completely inadequate to restrain it to the task for which it was created. It must include that we shall print our own money, that all laws violating it are expressly null & void, it must include meaningful penalty for those agents who violate it, and be expressly denied the ability to lay direct taxation.
As I see it, we either opt out, and go our separate ways returning to the sovreign states we were the full authority they are entitled - or set about fixing in dramatic way the compact on which this grea
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
Although I hate to experiment with privacy and freedom in this way, if it happens some interesting things might happen. I strongly oppose this and the overall trend towards the expansion of government powers.
People claim that the tracking and the law may be used as a smokescreen to persecute people arbitrarily. Since nearly everyone will be breaking the law at some point or another, law enforcement will have to filter out people they think are 'good' citizens because otherwise the burden on the justice system will be too great to handle everyone. I'm not sure this is true. If there was a database with the movements of everyone, and someone found themselves in court over an infraction, they could easily show that there are many other offenders out there that also have to be prosecuted, show bias from other prosecutions, and so on- all the data is out there and probably would be accessible to the defense. It's much easier to discriminate while enforcing a blanket law if the means of detection are also random and arbitrary (e.g. a cop riding around in a car only pulling over people within range).
The result may be one of two things- the first is the government would realize they can't give full due process to so many offenders and move to streamline the system.
Whenever anyone talks about making the government more efficient, you should suspect that the efficiency they're talking about is either one of taking away freedoms from ordinary individuals or of granting freedoms and immunities to large corporations- freedoms are kind of a big burden for the government to bear after all, it can operate with much more efficiency if it only has a handful of very wealthy 'citizens' it is granting rights to and representing the interests of rather than hundreds of millions of people. It's a human thing to do to make assumptions that will simplify the decision process- a congressperson can try to make out statistical mumbo-jumbo about the varied and subtle effects of a new law on the masses of diverse people or they can simply see that a handful of rich people or companies will add millions or billions to their profit margins as a result of a new law.
But the second result is that so many voters will be affected that they will move to get rid of stupid laws, or vastly decrease the negative effects of conviction. It's also possible the sort of crimes the government starts convicting of are made to be felonies, and then they can disenfranchise potential backlash voters very quickly- felons don't get to vote.
In the future, most of the people living in the country might be disenfranchised felons who can be easily stripped of remaining rights as the government sees fit.
One sure sign that the movement to add these tracking devices is a corrupt one is if there are any exceptions: rich people, government officials, or the police themselves will be able to disable or remove the devices legally?
and encourage fuel efficiency at the same time; but to charge different rates depending on congestion
When will governments get it into their heads that charging people more _won't_ reduce congestion. Do they think I spend an hour sitting in traffic each morning for fun? No - I spend an hour sitting in traffic each morning because I have to get to work, if I could avoid it I would.
(And no, I can't use public transport - it'd take me 3 or 4 hours to get the bus into work... Hell, when I used to work in the city centre (you would expect that to have good public transport) it used to take over an hour for the bus to do the 5 mile journey (which took 15 minutes by car) if it bothered to turn up at all. For the record, I live in Southampton, UK).
The way to get me to use public transport is to provide a service that is cost effective and actually *useful*. Making it faster for me to walk than catch the bus is not useful. Taxing the crap out of cars is not the answer since it unfairly hits all the people who can't use the bus for whatever reason (no bus service, disability, needing to transport large objects, etc)
http://blog.nexusuk.org
This is a very good idea. The cost of roads has nothing to do with what fuel your car uses, but gasoline taxes are currently the best way to get drivers to pay for roads.
Having intelligent streets that can automatically charge you for your share of the driving makes plenty of sense. Further, it might finally spawn the use of private roads, where companies would compete with the government on a per-mile cost of maintenance.
Note that this needn't be a GPS system. The most expensive roads could just have toll gates.
This, along with all public surveillance, should have a great deal of oversight.
Some economists are proposing legislation that would create a cabinet level post whose entire job is to act as watch-dog to any group doing domestic public surveillance. You can read a bit about it here
Robo-Blogs of the world: UNITE!
njyoder you ar wrong! TREAD is real.
2 3/1/1/
w ww.internetweek.com/allStories/showArticle.jhtml%3 FarticleID%3D49901229+%2B%22tread+act%22+%2Btires+ %2Brfid&hl=en
..
q s/rfid_considerations_specific_industries.html
m ns/trends/
Goodyear, Michelin and other tire manufacturers are claiming TREAD is the reason they are forced to put in spy RFID transmitter chips in all tires... not whims. A bylaw document addendum for TREAD is merely one strongarm tactic by feds that aided it to be fully adopted. AIAG manipulation was another.
Goodyear RFID tires from TREAD :
SNIPPET QUOTE EXCERPT:
"Tires have to have a unique identification number called a DOT number," he said. "Cars have a vehicle identification number. Under the TREAD Act, carmakers have to associate the unique number on each tire with the VIN of the car it's put on. RFID offers a cheaper way to do that association
web source : http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/12
Michelin RFID tires from TREAD :
SNIPPET QUOTE EXCERPT:
"The tire industry faces regulatory pressures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration requiring tire companies to monitor pressure and temperature in tires as part of the Tread Act, a much-publicized law passed in 2000 in response to the rollovers of Ford Motor Co.'s Explorers equipped with certain Firestone tires. The Tread Act states that the vehicle identification numbers must correlate with the Department of Transportation's number for the tire."
web source : http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:NKrAuVWpXksJ:
Industry and TREAD RFID
SNIPPET QUOTE EXCERPT:
"There are no industry-based automotive mandates out there today. Perhaps the only exception to this is the Tire TREAD Act in which RFID is specified as a method of identifying tires supplied to OEMs. The U.S. Congress passed the TREAD (Transportation, Recall, Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation) Act after the Firestone/Ford Explorer issues emerged. The act mandates that carmakers closely track tires from the 2004 model year on, so they can be recalled if there is a problem. "
web source : http://www.zebra.com/id/zebra/na/en/index/rfid/fa
===
SNIPPET QUOTE EXCERPT:
"For example, Michelin and Goodyear plan to use RFID to aid their compliance with the Transportation, Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act."
web source : http://www.fawcette.com/wss/2003_10/magazine/colu
You are probably an FBI shill for wanting to FACTUAL INFORMATIVE mod the post to -1 like it was 4 out of five times before... all using the feds shill accounts.
njyoder, If you have a fact to dispute then post your facts! Otherwise read and learn! The feds aready scan car tires on the roads.
Did you even READ this post, did you even read the other? or are you a sock puppet account for the FBI?
How many dead cars would we find on the highway - particularly in areas that don't get good reception to start with?
History ... American History. Try reading it. If you've done nothing wrong you still have plenty to fear.
They don't track the tires at speed, but at border crossings and the like.
So why don't we de-criminalize the whole issue. If you don't want to wear a seatbelt, you pay an extra fee when you license your vehicle, or renew your driver's license.
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
I know a lot of vehicles out there have rev-limiting and speed-limiting chips. I also know that there are mod-chips out there that remove those limits. So, we get this new GPS system for new cars. Shortly afterwards, someone develops a chip to get around that or posts instructions on how to disable it. If I ever had to buy a car with this system installed, the very next purchase I would make would be a mod-chip. Fuck the system.
I didn't say thrown out of the car, dumbass, I said out of the seat. Try driving with the front seat passenger in your lap (who is also required to be belted). It's the same reason racing cars have bucket seats, which basically prevent the driver from sliding side to side, unlike bench-style seats.
0 >not the only one who claims what I have said. But if you want to be an organ donor, by all means, be my guest.
You'll claim this is prattle, but I'm certainly http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?a=1388&q=25943
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Nothing is illegal if the people who are supposed to enforce the law are the ones commiting the crime. If the technology exists to track people, the government will track people. End of story.
In this case it probably doesn't, as the large business centers have commuters from states without large business centers. Of course, WV has Sen. Byrd, and as a result already gets more than its share of federal dollars. This is really just icing.
Overall, though, I'd agree that it's probably close enough for government purposes.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
How about instead of attacking the law enforcement agencies for trying to do their job
Nuremburg?
"Just following orders" just doesn't cut it.
But no doubt I'll get modded to hell and back for the reference to a certain unnamed historical police state which no one seems to want to admit the US (and western world in general) increasingly emulates.
And then of course, the security vs civil liberty problems. The government will be able to track to you to tax you, but the police will not be able to track you? Yeah right. Do you think criminals are stupid? Either they will tamper with the GPS, drive old beaters that don't have one, or they'll mug people on foot. It's just another way to keep ordinary folks in line.
"Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The Queen is their slave."
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.
If they implement this they should charge double for all the idiots who put their "snow tires" on in October and dont take them off until June!!! It doesn't really snow in oregon, but maybe, maybe once a year!!!!!
I agree, it is silly to think that Americans are going to go along with having to pay more tax based on how much we drive. Overwhelmingly in polls, and when given the chance to vote on it (Texas) they do not support these kinds of measures. It makes no difference, the government is doing it anyway. The Federal government is the wheel which is pushing this...
As far as the conspiracy theorists who think this is going to violate your privacy need to calm down. Even if this were to be come a common place device on all cars, you will be mearly a blip on some screen or in a computer in a large cloud of other blips. That hardly means that Big Brother is going to be staring into your life or mind 24hrs a day. You are going to have to do something to really standout in order for any law enforcement agency to take notice of your blip. Don't bet on it, and once people come to accept that the logs are a 'reliable indicator of where such and such is', it will be no problem to add entries to the log to place whomever they want at the scene of whatever they want. It also raises alarms about who else gets the data, the ability of the government to learn your habits, entire social network - so that should you ever become an enemy of the state all of your places of travel that you would go to would be known. Its about creating a climate of fear. You just wait till they get the ability to disable your vehicle remotely on top of it. Think I'm joking? They are talking about that as well.
I can think of thousands of malicious ways this can be used both by itself and in combination with existing and other serious encroachments on the table. Right now I'm thinking about the methods they used against nuclear protesting groups. If they had this system in place, they likely would have been disabling cars left and right and arranging for people to be stopped well away from the scene so they could disrupt their operations. The government went as far as to jam their phones, pagers, sabotage vehicles, install provocateurs to instigate violence (so they could arrest entire groups), they even distributed their own fliers with false dates - times - places for their events and rented a bus to take activist to a different location and cancelled the bus one group had rented. Couple this with things like MATRIX, REGENT and other databases (we have a national for fugatives that I can not think of at the moment), the TSA "NO FLY LIST", and cell phone and visual face recognition technology - and the potential to disrupt your life and be subject to a near complete control grid is endless. This is a government which disappears people, no trial, no lawyer, no hearings, no nothing. Indefinite detention without notificaiton. Somehow your "you must be doing something really important" assurance seems rather meaningless. One that is already so far out of control it threatens to declare martial law on a regular basis, herds protestors into pens miles away from events, and dresses its LEO's in all black riot gear with no name tags. It looks like a star wars episode with all of the riot gear, except they are in black and not white storm trooper gear at any major political event or trade conference. A government that calls us "civilians" instead of "citizens" like its an occupying force. Wake up already.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
Really? I read the Sokymat link that you pasted and I even searched the site, there's only one page about the RFID tire things and it doesn't mention anything about reading arbitrary RFID tags from 14 feet below, especially not at 100 km/hr. Why don't you provide proper sources? These are PASSIVE RFID tags (meaning that you have to get close to them to power them through induction), they're not going to be read except close up and certainly not at high speeds.
Those spinning rims should create an interference pattern. Or you could wrap them in tin foil.
-
Remember when you could go to the DMV without an appointment? They actually had to attend to you? How about when you could explain that your vehicle was not being operated and you did not owe them any money for it. Now you have to inform them ahead of time that it is no longer in service, and you have to pay to do them this favor! Thousands of people wind up paying the DMV for *not* using their roads. And what about the price of tickets, when were those prices snuck through. Who figured out that $50 isn't enough deterrent for speeding or not wearing your seat belt? Why the fuck is not wearing your seat belt an offence at all!
The very first licensing was started in New York City, and it was sold as to apply to commercial vehicles only. When this was voted upon, it was never intended to apply to non-commercial use of the roads. The arguement was that trucks were tearing up the roads and making lots of money off of it, so we should regulate it. The very idea that this would lead to lead to a defacto internal passport, mandatory insurance, picture ID, vehicle registration for everyone, license plates, city stickers, or that the right of free travel would be turned to a privilege by regulation was not a twinkle in the eyes of the voters who approved it -- but it was on the mind of a few of those legislators.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/Cfc_title49/publ414 .106.pdf
Go ahead and search it. It requires better labelling, but no RFID chips. There doesn't even seem to be anything in there to even let you identify a particular tire, just perhaps model and manufacture date or something.
Conspiracy theorists (and trolls) never check their sources too carefully, it just dampenens the ranting.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
All they have to do is embed a 10 - 12 foot long receiver antenna into the pavement. As the vehicle passes over the antenna array, the wheel will eventually rotate to a point that the RFID chip is only a fraction of an inch away from the surface of the road. Let's say the array is buried an 1 1/2" into the pavement, do you think an RFID reader can read a chip that's 2 inches away?
As for linking it to a person, all that needs to be done is have video footage of the car's license plate to be stored along with the RFID reading. Anytime that unique combination of four tires passes through a border crossing, there would be a record of you crossing it.
Divide by zero hurts my brain.
"And you care if the police know your location... why?"
... we've got it all. Fascism is the most popular form of government known to man. Democracy is HARD WORK, and America no longer has the patience or the education to maintain one, much less export it by means of rains of white phosphorus.
Because it't none of their fucking business, frankly. If you don't understand why that's important, then, welcome to Big Brother.
They've rounded up plenty of people on a whim, called them terrorists, tortured them, found they were clean, and then deported them. It's already happened.
People LIKE fascism. It makes them warm and comfy. Safe streets; the wrong sort of people rounded up, or in this case, tracked like dangerous dogs; prosperous companies making useful systems for a government that increasingly is owned by the businesses themselves; voting machines compromised; election tabulation in private, secret, partisan corporate hands; wrong sort of people kept penned away in assigned neighborhoods, kept of of decent people's hair; a nice assortment of external enemies to blow up and excoriate; eternal war against a non-existent (at first!) enemy; lovely merging of fundamentalist church and state; science brought to heel, made to serve the needs of business and government; charismatic leaders; news media brought down like errant servants, dishing up only prescribed information, those refusing being brought down and ruined by either smear or executive fiat; lobbying organizations brought under the control of the ruling party; permanent suspension of constitutional liberties; secret laws; secret prisons; torture; questioning the omnipotent ruler is labeled violently as a lack of patriotism; the ruler is equated with the nation itself; the ruler is equated with the armed forces; opposition is clearly labeled as treason, madness, badthinking
Fascisms only fall when they overreach themselves. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. But rarely do they fall because the majority of those ruled despise it.
It's welcomed with open arms. And much waving of flags. As Jerry Pournelle actually said when Bush assumed super-constitional power, "Ave, Caesar". Hail Caesar, he who will protect us and tell us what we want to hear.
Remember, it's not what they'll do with their power right now. The power is new to them, and they are still men who remember what a democratic society is like. They'll go easy with it. What you have to know is that the next generation, the one that was raised with dog searches of their school lockers, with strip searches in 2nd grade, random drug tests, secret prisons, secret police searches and arrests, listening to police state crap on TV every day of their lives... THEY'LL bring hell to Earth, because they will think police states are the way things should be. They'll not understand why anyone would object. Slavery will be normal to them.
Not any more. California smog regs got changed a couple years ago, and they apply to ALL cars, regardless of age.
My 1978 truck is a fine example -- it used to always pass, being well below the max smog level. Two years ago it failed *because the standards had been changed*, and the fact that my truck was manufactured back in an era of token smog standards was no defense. It now failed the smog test, and required $500 of messing with to get it to pass.
OTOH cars less than 6 years old are no longer required to be smogged. I can hear the hand of auto dealerships in that one!!
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Thats why there are terrorist you all deserve to die.
The federal government allocates money to states to pay for roads like this. States were paid federal taxpayer money to build the interstate system like the Turnpikes. So, regardless of gassing up in NJ or not, NJ gets money. Federal taxes are in every gallon of gas:
S tates_of_America
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_tax#United_
If they really need more local money, all a state has to do is be reasonable relative to it's neighbors in gas price.
The reason I say the PA turnpike is horrible is that I often take the N/S 476 turnpike to route 80 and take that to ohio (travel west a lot) and get to the same destination faster and without traffic that the 76 for a fraction of the price. I understand the 76 is more traveled, but the free 80 is in better condition, with a faster speedlimit, less traffic, and sometimes is three lanes! The expensive turnpike is still 2 lanes like the 50s (the company owned turnpike probably has the money to improve it but no incentive, no one is going to take route 80 if their final destination is in southern PA) and has road repairs all the time and is monitored like crazy by the state troopers.
I ride a stripped down chopper to work. Where are they going to put it that isn't sticking out like a sore thumb?
For that matter, in my home town of Portland, Oregon, there are thousands of folks who ride bicycles full time. They share the same roads and even have their own lane. Are they going to stick GPS tracking devices on them too and make them pay for road use?
This is rediculous.
You realize that those RFID tags are specially designed for that, right? You can't just do it with any arbitrary RFID tag and it doesn't make sense that they'd use these more expensive RFID tags in their tires. It has to drive right under it or over it. You'd be better off with a camera.
I was rather awestruck to find this comment in the article:
The U.S. Supreme Court said in two cases, U.S. v. Knotts and U.S. v. Karo, that Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy when they're driving on a public street.
The Supreme Court has decided that "privacy" only applies to your presence in places that are "non-public". I think this is a gross misinterpretation of the intent of the 4th Amendment. When this was written, there was no concept at all of anything related to being able to observe someone without their knowledge, and without the observer's physical, corporeal presence. As such, there were obvious limitations to just how much observation could actually happen. This is a good thing, because it meant that observation (even in "public" areas) was a costly endeavor, and something to be used wisely. They had no other choice.
Today, however, all that's required is the installation of a few electronic components that can take the place of any number of physical observers. The fact that there are no salaries to pay, no benefits, and no retirement plans to worry about, in addition to the fact that they are available 24/7, make them a very inexpensive proposition. Now, you have "public" areas that can be under constant surveillance, watching. Watching for speeders, watching for red-light runners, potentially watching for road use, potentially watching for -- pretty much anything. The number of potential infractions will only grow, because observation can be done efficiently, and there is money attached (the fines/taxes you pay associated with the various points of observation). The number of ways that you can not only be inadvertently ID'd, but also profiled is growing at what some might consider an alarming rate.
Knowing the potential for government abuse, I have a hard time believing that this is what the framers of the U.S. Consitution had in mind- that "public" area means you have no expection to be LEFT THE HELL ALONE if you are not already suspected of having committed a crime.
There is no constitutional right to travel
WTF are you smoking?
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Go re-read your constitution, and the federalist papers. The constitution does not grant rights, rights are inherent. They only listed a few important ones within the constitution, but because these are natural rights you have them and a host of others even if they are not listed in the constitution....
Even if you ignore the ninth and tenth amendments, what about the first?
E.G. "the right of the people peaceably to assemble"? obviously we the people cannot assemble without traveling to said assembly. So yeah, I'd say that alone says we DO have the right of travel.
As for the right to track you,
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This is to my mind clearly a case of unreasonable search and seizure. The right of the people to be secure in their persons surely means secure from tracking my whereabouts.
People like you scare me. It is a sad testament to what america and its educational system have become.
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
....were the government able to watch my every move, convict me of my every 'crime.'.....
The problem with being able to catch and punish every offense from jaywalking upward is that soon the majority of the population would be locked up at worst, or at best broke from all the fines and penalties levied. I doubt that there are very many, if any, persons who have not broken some law every single day. When driving, do you REALLY come to a FULL STOP at every stop sign? Did you use your turn signals EVERY time you were required to do so? If your state charges sales tax, did you pay it on that out of state order on the Internet as would have if you had bought it downtown? When was the last time you got paid for a service you provided, but did not tell the IRS?
What if technology to catch "criminals" got even better, so that a mandatory annual "mind scan" transmittted every thought you had to a recording device, similar to downloading data from a computer disk drive? Such technology might get you to be "good" because of fear of punishment, but it would really make it so you would WANT to be good just because being good is the right thing? WANTING to be good requires a fundamental change in attitude and mind coupled with somehow the imparting of the ability to BE good. Of course if those making the laws could not exempt themselves from such a technology, it would probably not get implemented.
Defining what is good is another problem. Perhaps true adherence to and obedience to the "Golden Rule" is a reasonable definition at least for starters.
All theory is gray
I'll let them track my cars when they let me track thiers. I'd be good to know when there comming to get me.
Secondly, my points are equally valid if you have been hit hard enough to knock you out of your seat.
Thirdly, I've looked at the web sites you mentioned. So What? You still took a serious hit and will be stunned until everthing stops moving around. I'm not talking about 1 or 2 G's of lateral acceleration.
Your primary argument was that wearing a seatbelt makes it safer for other drivers. My point is that by the time the seat belt kicks in it is already too late. Any impact on driver safety is stricly for the wearer at this point. The other drivers are on their own.
Therefore your argument justifying seat belts as a safety device for other people is a false argument.
If you are so ignorant as to think that Affirmative Action is a major problem in race relations today then you need to pull your head out of your ass and start looking at the country.
A blog about stuff.
The trouble is...with so many obscure laws and such out there...just about 99.999% of people break all kinds of laws almost daily. If someone with power, or connections to such wanted to just 'get' you somehow. If they track you long enough, they'll find something you did.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Wow...that's a new one on me. I've never heard of a DMV that would take appointments!! Where do you live that they do this?
Frankly, if I could do that..I'd almost prefer it so you could know when to go to get in/out.
They way it is down here...you go, and it is a crapshoot as to how packed and backed up the place is. In LA, I basically take a whole day off work if I have to go to the DMV for almost anything...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Mister Anonymous, while I may or may not be an FBI shill (you decide!), you may be interested to know that you can go "back in time" on the internet using www.archive.org - it lets you see copies of past websites and you may be able to find your 'proof' links there.
Ah.. I grew up not far from where 80 intersects the NE Extension (I-476, used to be PA 9 back in the day). I went to school in Pittsburgh and almost always took I-80. I took 76 once because I had to drop a friend off in Philadelphia over one holiday break and I agree with you that 80 is better. (more senic too!)
Huh?? where the hell do you live that you need an appointment to go to the fscking DMV???
Tell me so I never have to move there. Stupidest thing I've heard yet (today
A better option IMO that obviates the need to regularly register your mileage, is simply to raise automotive taxes. Amortize up front the expected taxes on the entire automobile when purchased new -- obviously the government thinks it knows how much it should charge per mile of roadway use, so simply multiply by the expected lifetime of the car. If you sell the car later / trade in, you deserve to get back the amortized difference. No loss of privacy, no checkups, no reports, no registrations, no problems. And because many cars don't make it to their guestimated lifetimes (accidents / etc.) the government could probably come out ahead on it. You could even cut gas taxes, so buying the car is $EXPENSIVE$ but owning and operating gets cheaper. Since most people consider cars to be big-ticket items anyway... Sure, we would need a transition plan, maybe ramp up cost per mile on the car over the next 20 years, and poof, adjusted consumers, funded highways, privacy maintained.
Seems like the easiest solution to me.
In Soviet Russia, us are belong to all your base.
They already have a gas tax. People who drive more or drive heavier vehicles pay more. So maybe you need to ask why they're not happy with an inexpensive, easy way to collect that revenue and want to go with something like this.
Was a typo on my part - I meant drinking age.
That's what I get for posting when I've got insomnia.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Hmm....this sounds an awful lot like the Patriot Act. It is amazing what the public will accept in times of (perceived) crisis.
More than my privacy, however, I fear having to pay $0.10 / mile as soon as they figure out how to monitor me.
-- Posted from my parent's basement
AC: Damn, those greedy bastards... Trying to save your life for a buck.
Thanks for the links -- I've never seen a list at all before this, but it is my understanding that GM cars have *all* had black boxes for awhile.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
I highly doubt what those websites tell me because they offer no scientific evidence to support their claims.
And you have ones that prove otherwise?
Tell you what, let's try an experiment. You play Halo while I periodically shove you sideways, against someone else who gets pushed, but belts hold him in the chair. Who do you think would do better?
Question everything, sure, but that applies to your own beliefs as well.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
My idea is a using the Preview button and a checking your posts so you don't a sound like a Luigi from a Futurama.
If I'm not under active investigation for breaking the law, then its none of their damned business where i go, or what i do. None, zilch, zero, zip.
Has nothing to do with people 'cheating' and not being able to get away with it now. It has all to do with the citizen's rights and freedoms.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
hmm i'd think a typical shoulder belt would be pretty terrible at stopping sideways movement in one direction and possiblke quite destructive in the even of big sideways movement in the other
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Not getting into whether it will become illegal to do so, I have to surmise that any technology created can be defeated. It's the basic principle of computer security, and is every bit as valid here.
It's hard to track a vehicle that just broadcasts a GPS signal from the same 10-foot area in Siberia 24x7, or that doesn't broadcast anything at all. As for RFID tracking in tires, if you can find the frequency of the chip it shouldn't be too hard to take care of (or overload electronically, somehow).
I don't doubt that they're trying to track movement - that is nothing new. And I certainly can't stop them from videotaping me, which they already do to motorists every day. But knowing where I go minute by minute (and likely why I go there) is just going too far. Too much potential for abuse, and too little history of responsible use of power by the people who want to know. I don't break laws that will put me in jail, but at the same time I have to expect that I can move from place to place without being questioned, tracked, and scrutinized. This just reeks of the Soviet-era "show me your papers" stuff, and at some point enough is enough.
Of course in Germany, Hitler rose to power by either silencing those who opposed him, or by convincing the masses by and large that there was nothing to fear. I wonder if one day the world will need to be saved from itself, or if it will slip into a global police state where your every communication, motion, and action is monitored and analyzed by those who believe they're right and should control you. Hell, maybe this sounds like paranoia - it might be. But I'm also fairly observant, and don't have some anti-government agenda. I just think we are globally heading down a path that will put us in a place we died to get other countries out of 55 years ago.
I think we're going to go downhill before it gets better... But we'll see.
I was reading about a new requirement that all cell phones made after January, 2006 must have a GPS chip in them -- ostensibly to provide 911 service, but I'm sure, mostly to provide location of the user. The chip is not required to provide GPS service usage to the user.
In Gulf War I, I was watching a news program that talked about how the Laser Printers had chips in them that, when hit by a satellite signal, would identify the location of the device. This was used to target "command centers" -- but probably, just places where someone had some computers. My more cynical nature now wonders how everyone getting killed is an insurgent.
Anyway, the efforts to track everything are coming along nicely. I am somehow more troubled by the ability to halt all crime than I am by crime itself. I suppose I'd feel differently after I was blown up -- but you see how difficult it would be for me to learn that lesson?
Just more grist for the mill.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
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...
There shouldn't need to be a provision in the law for this. It's part of the US Constitution or have Oregon and Washington suddenly seceded from the union without anyone being the wiser.
Quote from the Bill of Rights -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
I'd say that tracking wherer you go would fall under "be violated" part.
2 cents,
Queen B
HDGary secures my bank
Stop modding this guy down just because he seems to be crazy. That's not what mod. points are for. This is a very interesing rant and brought about a lot of discussion. It's on topic, it's got interesting links, it should be +5 interesting. Wrong, but interesting. If you disagree, post. Don't try to argue with mod. points. Read the moderator guidelines.
-Ryan C.
I don't see this as a positive trend. There are certain "infrastructure" items provided in a society for the common good. Providing them at a fixed-cost allows considerably greater mobility and freedom for "users" without having to worry about "the small stuff".
How is charging per-minute usage fees on roads, or charging for length traveled, or "weight" on a road, different than charging per-minute internet access fees, distance or volume charges?
I don't think it would be economically viable to start charging highway usage by the mile. I don't know about every location, but in areas of high property value, those "servicing" the local residents (think teachers, nurses, et al. in addition to standard service type jobs) often cannot afford to live in the communities in which they work due to cost: they have to commute from outside the area because the area is too expensive. Charging per-mile type fees for drivers will hit those who have to commute to work. Those who can telecommute, or who are paid well enough to afford "local" housing will be least affected. It seems this just has the effect of increased separation between the haves (living near their job, or not needing to work), and those having to drive to work.
Again, so often there is the NotInMyBackYard syndrome -- usually more so from affluent or "quality-of-life"-special communities. In the SF Bay Area, mass transit was supposed to encircle the bay and taxes were levied many years ago to implement such, but snotty towns have put up roadblocks to having tracks through their cities or having rail-stops exit in their cities (we don't want commuting "riff-raff" exiting in our city -- or even rails going through it!...atherton.ca.us, et al).
subject says it all
Think Deeply.
At no time, ever, is the location of a commercial aircraft unknown. Sure, private small planes flying VFR no one really cares about. But all commercial planes (the vast majority of all traffic) are being tracked to the meter...
Likewise, why should they care about people's personal vehicles? Sure, tracking commercial trucks, buses, semis, etc. is one thing, but why should they be tracking my car?
The general idea is to make public transport more cost effective, by comparison, by making cars less so. Ideally, the response should be more people using public transport, and that (with more income and demand) eventually results in more frequent and convenient public transport. Unfortunately this doesn't happen overnight, even if it works there will be a period of some years when you both pay more to use cars and still have poor public transport. I personally ride a bike whenever possible and avoid both options.
I don't know about Canada, but in the US it is not illegal to tamper with your odometer. If it's your car, you can do with it as you like. What you can't do is tamper with the odometer and then sell the car without disclosing that the odometer is not accurate.
Maybe because the police are tired of scraping up the remains of all the dumbshits who didn't wear their seat belts?
Maybe police don't like breaking up domestic quarrels and directing traffic either, but it's their damn job! They are being paid by my taxes besides, so I don't want any grousing.
BTW, I don't have a problem with getting tickets, but I recognize that they are excessive (no, of course that was never on the ballot - get real).
<remainder of reply aborted due to your bad attitude>
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
Can I kick your ass after you don't stop shoving me? ;-) (I know. Internet bravado)
The answer is that both will miss badly. And we're not talking about a little shove either. Knock him over. Hit him on the head with a frying pan, and let's see how much better that belted player does.
The argument is specious and not even a significant reason for this parental legislation.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
Can I assume that you would outlaw motorcycles then? As a former rider, I can tell you how vulnerable we are out there. Let's start the parade of curtailing rights, because state money could possibly be involved - but take a minute to realize just how broad of a criterion that is. I think you could justify pretty much anything.
Personally, I think you should get thirty days in county lock-up if you don't wear a sweater outdoors in cold weather. We can't let these scoff-laws burden our government infrastructure.
Hint: Replace "scoff-law" with "ordinary citizen" to get the sarcasm.
I was so sad to witness the paid promotion of our local click-it or ticket campaign. When the police think it's a good idea to victimize ordinary citizens commiting no other offense, instead of pursuing more reckless behaviors or even...ahem... serious crime, then we have definitely gone down the wrong path. Do you feel bad about that misspent money? Or is it just medical expenses that piss you off?
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
Yes, because every contact between automobiles *ever* results in both vehicles exploding instantly.
Believe it or not, *sometimes* you get clipped slightly. *Of course* if you get t-boned, there's no more driving to do. But when Joe Cellphone cuts it too close and tags you in the corner and you start to spin, you being held better in you seat does help hold you behind that wheel. That's why NASCAR drivers can keep off the wall when they get clipped at 180; the same applies to Mr. Average at 40.
You want a test? Get a car with a vinyl bench front seat, and put on some nylon track pants. Go to a parking lot, and set up some cones to make an autocross course. Try doing the course with your seat belt on, and without. Betcha get better times with the belt on.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
I don't suppose you have any links to your earlier posts on /.?
I''m not sure were the problem realy is. If your not wearing a sesatbelt, you are more likley to just die in the crash and the medical bills would be less then if you wore the seatbelt.
It is a freedom thing. Helmets are the same way. I wonder what the position would be if you factor in the other driver being at fault. and what should happen when thier insurance or money runs out.
I guess requiring everyone to wear a helmet while outdoors might be a good thing too. Cars have been known to hit pedestrians in the past. I guess those medical bills amount to a large sum too.
Most people i know consider seat belt laws to be just there so the cops know who to blame. If every one gets tossed around the car, it is hard to tell who was driving or at fault for the accident.
In my defensive driving course, they did say the reaosn for wearing a seatbelt was to keep control of the vehicle if possible. The idea was as the parent stated, it keeps you in your seat to do whatever possible and keeps the passenger out of your lap and interfereing.
I would consider you correct though. In the majority of situations, this reasoning is mute. I have however been saved because i wasn't wearing a seatbelt in an auto accident. I was shoved sidways and pined under the dash while the top of the car was peeled off from sliding on the roof. A seatbelt would have caused my head to grind against the asphalt and metal as it passed through the car. (BTW the accident wasn't my fault)
The general idea is to make public transport more cost effective, by comparison, by making cars less so. Ideally, the response should be more people using public transport, and that (with more income and demand) eventually results in more frequent and convenient public transport. Unfortunately this doesn't happen overnight, even if it works there will be a period of some years when you both pay more to use cars and still have poor public transport.
Well, there are several problems with this approach:
1. The UK government raises taxes on fuel to make cars more expensive. Of course, busses also run on fuel and have to pay the increased tax so they raise their prices to compensate - the only winning party is the government who now gets more cash from taxing everyone. Maybe public transport should be allowed to use red diesel?
2. What if there's no sensible bus route and there's never likely to be (e.g. rural areas)? Why should I be charged a prohibutive amount of money to use the only form of transport available (car)?
3. Certain activities *can't* be done by bus - for example, I can't take all my windsurfing kit from my home to the beach by bus. Why should I be charged a prohibutive amount of money for the only sensible form of transport for the activity? (I already pay a crazy amount of money to the council for parking at the beach anyway).
And it doesn't just stop at busses - I will be going skiing this winter with 3 other people via the channel tunnel. The return train journey from Southampton to London Waterloo (the terminal for the channel tunnel) is going to cost us 120 pounds. The only reason this is even worth considering is because we're going for a week so have long stay parking to consider. If we were going for a day it's way more cost effective to take a car rather than using public transport (taking a car would probably cost about 15 pounds in fuel).
If public transport is so much more efficient than a car it _should not cost 10 times as much_ in the first place, if it does there's something very wrong. Raising the price of using cars is not the answer because it hits everyone who has no choice, fixing the public transport system is what needs to be done.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
I usually wear my seat belt, I consider it more of an advantage than a disadvantage. The thing I was objecting to was the idea that giving up rights would somehow make me safer. The idea that seat belts must be required because they make it safer for other drivers is a toxic idea. The level of safety increase for others is so miniscule that that argument if it is accepted can be used to justify almost anything.
I was actually more concerned about the erosion of civil rights, particularly privacy, than I was about the safety issues. The argument as advanced could be used to justify putting everyone under 24/7 survaillence in the name of keeping them from performing some act that may unintentionaly harm or inconvienience others. Basicly a police state.
Why bother to go to all the hassle of rigging gps devices when you can just steal a car. Change vehicles a couple of times in a busy car park [one in a nice steel framed building might be good if you suspect gps...] and the cops are way off the scent.
No criminal with any sense blows up a bank and drives off in their own car - even now (gps or not).
Your response basically mirrored the other one but since you were more polite I'll respond to you.
First of all I never mentioned the federal speed limit, which was imposed for conservation reasons in the 1970's and to which both your posts referred.
I was actually referring to the development of state and local speed limits from the early 1900's to the 1970's, when the "federal 55" was imposed. During that time period the raising of the state or local limit was often in response to how fast people were actually driving--i.e. everyone was breaking the law so they changed the law. In the early 1900s, many towns had speed limits well under 25 mph throughout, for instance.
Obviously such a method of advancement would be hard to imagine in a world where the current speed limit is enforced with 100% effectiveness.
To call in another example--would record labels and TV networks be as interested in online distribution if the government could stop all online trafficking of copyrighted material?
The human tension between those disobeying and those enforcing the laws of the country is an integral part of the progress of American society, as both sides are citizens and in many ways equal (if enough citizens don't like a law, it can be changed). If you take humans out of the equation (automatic law enforcement) I think there's a real risk of dramatically changing the dynamic from a tension between equals, to a police state supervising its wards.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I can see your point and clearly champion it. I'm all for laws that directly stop some one from intentionaly or accidentaly hurting someon else because of carlessness or negligence. These law might be somethign like not discharging a firearm within the city limits or driving on a certain side of the road or asaulting someone. But as you said, the "You might have a chance at making an accident slightly less horrid by wearing a seatbelt" or "it protects the other guy" argument is going over the top. I can see the laws that require people to wear helmets when walking down the street being passed under the same guise.
It might not be long before someone says you need to either use a condom or have a current medical examination clearing you of any STD before having sex with anyone other then your spouse. Could you imagine having to pay the state $160 fine for having unprotected sex? Your chances of hurting yourself or someone else while having unprotected sex seems greater then having an accident were a seatbelt would make that kind of difference. So whats stoping a law like this from law form being passed? The fact nobody thinks having sex is a priviledge given by the government so they don't see them as a regulating authority maybe? We don't need a police state.
You are right. It is like the "its for the children" argument that makes anyone aposed to some view seem like a child hater that should be ignored or demonized. If you apose the "it might save someone elses life argument, it might mean you are a killer waiting for a victom. The entire "we need to protect you or some one from you" attitude can go along ways into stealing privacy and rites.
Firstly, the vast majority of the traffic is not actually big-jet-commercial (they are just more visible because they are bigger and make an awful lot more noise). Not all commercial planes are 'tracked' either. Those flights around the Grand Canyon are below radar coverage, pipeline patrol is generally VFR and outside of radar coverage, helicopter flights taking workers to platforms in the Gulf of Mexico usually aren't talking to anyone either. There are also still areas (albeit limited) that passenger flights are out of radar coverage, for example, during the approach phase for the commuter airliners going into somewhere like Victoria Regional in Texas which doesn't even have a control tower.
Where airliners are getting radar cover, it's hardly tracking to the meter either - the radar just isn't that accurate. The radar also relies on the airliner's transponder returns for altitude which is only accurate within 100 feet at best.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Further remember things like "free speech zones" (for the right to assemble), the recent upholding of the right of the constabulary to require you to show identification in (essentially all circumstances), the fact that driving is not a right but a privledge, arbitrary searches for airline (and perhaps eventually all other public) travel as well as essentially arbitrary prohibitions against certain people travelling. Note that there have been several recent incidents where people have been arrested or removed from public transportation for not showing id Remember that people are often stopped for just walking around in some neighborhoods (perhaps it is the wrong time of day, perhaps they are just the wrong color).
Finally remember that interstate travel may well be covered by the "commerce clause", which makes it federal jurisdiction and subject to rules imposed by the congress and executive branch.
None of this is precluded by the fourth amendment. Searches and seizures need to be "unreasonable" to be illegal and the courts have found more and more things "reasonable" - especially in the aftermath of the September, 2001 WTC incident.
"People like you scare me. It is a sad testament to what america and its educational system have become."
People like you scare me, you're not paying attention.