Slashdot Mirror


Car Owners to be Notified of Blackboxes in Vehicle

smooth wombat writes "As a follow-up to this long ago posting, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has passed a resolution requiring car manufacturers to inform buyers if their cars are equipped with Event Data Recorders (EDRs). The new regulation also standardizes what information is to be collected. Car manufacturers must comply with the new regulation beginning in the 2011 model year."

9 of 334 comments (clear)

  1. another new law by Balthisar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do we ALSO need a law to indicate that it's illegal to remove my own property from the car and then destroy that property if I'm in an accident? Imagining that it's my fault, that is. It's not evidence of a crime, unless I intentionally caused the accident.

    Are police just entitled to come along and remove it from my car without my permission now? Do they have to ask?

    --
    --Jim (me)
  2. Re:I like it. by rkcallaghan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This black box technology could hedge my (and others) bets on accurately describing what "went down".

    No, not really. You see, the black box can tell your insurance company that you were going 5 over the limit to pass someone, which could invalidate your claim (you were speeding). It has no idea that the other party was a 30-something on their cell phone with their laptop open, swerving to avoid the teenagers joyriding in the wrong lane with their lights off.

    ~Rebecca

  3. Attorneys everywhere rejoice!! by JonTurner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was telling an attorney friend about EDR's and his response was "really? I suppose that means I can subpoena that information and admit it for evidence. Unless it's ruled self-incrimination..." We spent about an hour discussing and it brought up a whole bunch of interesting questions: Is the information on this machine considered part of a persons "papers or effects" or is all information now property of the government court to be surrendered on demand? Is destroying this device considered tampering with evidence... do I have a right to smash up my own car (computer, books, diary, etc.)? If not, I think this intrudes on my property rights. Where does the court's right to information about me end and my rights to my own property and information begin? Is it safe to say "none of your damned business" any more?

  4. Re:Hysterical over nothing, data doesn't leave car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The data is my intellectual property. Their copying it violates my copyright. Even the insurance companies are scared of the DMCA.

  5. Re:There is always a cost.... by imemyself · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why should anyone ever have to prove their innocence?

    --
    Every time you post an article on Slashdot, I kill a server. Think of the servers!
  6. Re:I like it. by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, you missed the GP post's point.

    And you missed the counter-argument's point.

    The blackbox in the idiot's car would indicate his reckless driving.

    What if it turns out HIS blackbox shows him driving straight and normal at the speedlimit. (sure he still ran a red light and t-boned you... but the blackbox shows nothing strange)... and YOUR blackbox shows you driving 2km over the limit with a recent swerves when you dodged a few pieces of debris on the road.

    Sure he ran the red light, but your own blackbox paints an unflattering picture of your driving.

    Its a knife that cuts both ways. Some times it will cut both ways at once; sure it might identify the other driver as a weaving/hard braking idiot -- but what if it also shows you were going slightly over the speed limit or had done some recent swerving around? Your insurance company might still nail you with higher rates or reduce their coverage.

  7. Re:I like it. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ultimately, it comes down to who has control of the data. If the police can routinely interrogate these devices without the vehicle owner's permission (much less a warrant) then they are of little value to the consumer. The preliminary OBDIII (On Board Diagnostics III) specifications that I've looked at include the ability for cops (or anyone with the proper equipment) to retrieve information from these things wirelessly and without notifying the driver. I really don't think I like that.

    Frankly, there's a good chance that any such black box that is installed in any car I purchase will suffer the effects of a nearby lightning strike. Or maybe a transient short in the ignition system will take care of the problem. Unfortunately, odds are that this will not be a separate device but simply more memory and firmware in the existing vehicle computer.

    Still ... firmware can be replaced.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  8. Re:I like it. by DJCacophony · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If you're accident free, why would the data be interesting?"

    "If you're terrorist free, why would recordings of all your telephone conversations be interesting?"
    "If you're treason free, why would a log of all your internet activity be interesting?"
    "If you're not searching for child porn, why would a database of all your searches/web browsing being released to the general public be interesting?"

    --
    Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
  9. Re:There is always a cost.... by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most judges won't dismiss based on something as minor as the wrong date. In some jurisdictions (Virginia, for example), even something like the cop not showing up won't automatically get you off (despite the fact that he's the only witness, therefore you're losing the crucial right to cross-examination).

    If you've been tagged with radar/laser, the best solution for most people, especially those with a clean record, is just to plead guilty (IN COURT -- don't pay in advance), apologize, and ask for the mercy of the court. Emphasize your record, and that you really want to keep it spot free and promise that this was a one-time thing. If your case has anything unusual about it, then it might be beneficial to argue, but in most cases it's not and will only convince the judge that you're not remorseful and therefore deserve the full punishment.

    Speeding tickets are income; it's as simple as that. There's no incentive for the courts to take the cases seriously because there's a ton of cases and, for most people, the penalties are minor enough that they won't do anything beyond complaining to their friends. Hiring a lawyer usually means the case will just last longer, which will likely irritate the judge -- not what you want to do. The reality is that speeding in and of itself is not reckless or dangerous. If passing someone going 20MPH faster on a freeway is reckless, then by that logic, passing someone coming the opposite direction on a two lane road at 45MPH (closing speed of 90) must be downright suicidal, yet somehow most of the country manages such feats without much of a problem. Dodging, weaving, driving erratically, unpredictibly, and/or inattentively is what's really dangerous. The fact that speeding often accompanies those behaviors, and the fact that it's easier to spot speeders than inattentive drivers has villianized speeding. The fact that some people get mad seeing others "break the law" while they're working hard to obey it doesn't help either. These people don't question the rules; they just want everyone to follow them because they feel obliged to. They're free feel that way, of course, but it just perpetuates the situation.

    At any rate, speeding tickets aren't much of a problem for most people, because they're statistically unlikely to get more than an occasional ticket. Unfortunately -- by virtue of random distribution -- some people accumulate a lot of tickets and suffer serious, life-altering consequences such as losing their license indefinately. The "simple" solution is, of course, driving the speed limit, but in most places that's tough to do. "Peer pressure" to go with the flow of traffic can be overwhelming, especially for new drivers/young people, and the flow is rarely at or below the speed limit. Nobody wants to be "that guy" with 20 cars stuck behind him. Furthermore there's no such thing as a perfect driver, since we're all human. It's just a matter of chance as to whether there's a cop around to see you screw up, and whether or not he wants to write tickets.