Big Brother getting Bigger... again...

[RandallNeighbour]

Just imagine the hayday the insurance companies will have with this information...

"Dear Sir:

Due to information recorded on your black box, we have determined that it is not in the best interest of our shareholders to insure your Porsche Boxster. The data reflects that you exceeded the speed limit on 219 occurrences in the past 12 months.

Sincerely,

State Farm Insurance Companies"

[blue2000s]

I can't believe some of you think this would be a good idea. Someone tracking where you are going, what you are doing and how you got there? How do you know who that person is and what they're using the information for? If you volunteer to be tracked, that's one thing, but the government telling you that you will be tracked is totally out of line.

"I have nothing to hide" isn't the point and is very short sighted, you are an American and as such you have rights to privacy and free will. These rights get chipped away with every new law intended to "protect" us. You could be very safe if the government mandated how you live your life, but what kind of a life is that? Come on people, look at the big picture!

Originally Posted by blue2000s

I can't believe some of you think this would be a good idea. Someone tracking where you are going, what you are doing and how you got there? How do you know who that person is and what they're using the information for? If you volunteer to be tracked, that's one thing, but the government telling you that you will be tracked is totally out of line.

OK, maybe I'm naive, but why should I care about someone knowing were I am and how I got there?

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by bmussatti

OK, maybe I'm naive, but why should I care about someone knowing were I am and how I got there?

This is just a very small part of a much larger issue. It's called privacy and it's your right, whether you choose to exercise it or not.

[berj]

Originally Posted by bmussatti

OK, maybe I'm naive, but why should I care about someone knowing were I am and how I got there?

Because one day something legal you do today may be declared illegal. And then someone can go back on all of the records they have for you and determine that you used to do alot of that thing and decide you're a threat of some sort.

Or.

every day you happen to stop at this really great hot-dog vendor and buy a hot dog. You pull your car up, get out.. buy a dog, eat it and get back on your way. Now.. as it turns out they find that said hot dog vendor is a terrorist/drug-dealer/general malcontent. Since they have nice records of you stopping there every day and buying a hot dog.. well.. you must be involved. Off for questioning you go.. maybe you'll be cleared.. but your reputation will be quite nicely tarnished.

The former may be a bit far fetched.. but I've seen the latter happen when the only records they have are visual sightings.. imagine how much more weight these sorts of accusations will have with cold, hard facts.


Now.. that's just when 'they' is a government organization who (let's give them the benifit of the doubt) are just doing what seems right. What if its someone intent on doing you harm? Just because your data is *supposed* to be used in some way.. doesn't mean that it can't and won't be used in another (eg the recent release of search requests by AOL).

Having something to hide isn't just about doing illegal things.. it's doing things that other people have no business knowing about. So what if I go and rent porn from the shop down the road? Should that mean that somone who hacks into the database that contains my travel information should be able to release that knowledge to the world?

I still put my mail in envelopes, I still close my door and windows at night, I still want privacy. It's really pretty simple.

Berj

Originally Posted by berj

Because one day something legal you do today may be declared illegal. And then someone can go back on all of the records they have for you and determine that you used to do alot of that thing and decide you're a threat of some sort.

Or.

every day you happen to stop at this really great hot-dog vendor and buy a hot dog. You pull your car up, get out.. buy a dog, eat it and get back on your way. Now.. as it turns out they find that said hot dog vendor is a terrorist/drug-dealer/general malcontent. Since they have nice records of you stopping there every day and buying a hot dog.. well.. you must be involved. Off for questioning you go.. maybe you'll be cleared.. but your reputation will be quite nicely tarnished.

The former may be a bit far fetched.. but I've seen the latter happen when the only records they have are visual sightings.. imagine how much more weight these sorts of accusations will have with cold, hard facts.


Now.. that's just when 'they' is a government organization who (let's give them the benifit of the doubt) are just doing what seems right. What if its someone intent on doing you harm? Just because your data is *supposed* to be used in some way.. doesn't mean that it can't and won't be used in another (eg the recent release of search requests by AOL).

Having something to hide isn't just about doing illegal things.. it's doing things that other people have no business knowing about. So what if I go and rent porn from the shop down the road? Should that mean that somone who hacks into the database that contains my travel information should be able to release that knowledge to the world?

I still put my mail in envelopes, I still close my door and windows at night, I still want privacy. It's really pretty simple.

Berj

Hi Berj, I guess these are all valid points, but just not a concern to me.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by berj

...every day you happen to stop at this really great hot-dog vendor and buy a hot dog. You pull your car up, get out.. buy a dog, eat it and get back on your way. Now.. as it turns out they find that said hot dog vendor is a terrorist/drug-dealer/general malcontent. Since they have nice records of you stopping there every day and buying a hot dog.. well.. you must be involved. Off for questioning you go.. maybe you'll be cleared.. but your reputation will be quite nicely tarnished...Having something to hide isn't just about doing illegal things.. it's doing things that other people have no business knowing about. So what if I go and rent porn from the shop down the road? Should that mean that somone who hacks into the database that contains my travel information should be able to release that knowledge to the world?

I still put my mail in envelopes, I still close my door and windows at night, I still want privacy. It's really pretty simple.

Berj

Hi,

WOW! Great analogy! I live in St. Paul/ Mpls. and on the West Side of St. Paul (the historical Mexican Community), there used to be this terrific Taco Van. One of my best friends is of Mexican decent and grew up in that neighborhood and we used to go all the time to get our Tacos there - Best in the City!

Anyway, I used to belong to a Thursday Night Poker Game frequented by several St. Paul Cops, a couple from the Narc and Vice Squads. One Thurs. one of them said "You know, we got you on a Surveillance Tape last week..." Surprised I asked why and he said that the Taco Van was a front for a Cocaine Dealer and that they had a surveillance camera on it all week. He then went on to say that it was lucky I didn't ask for a White Bean Taco, the codeword for a Gram of Coke. Said they nabbed the Dealer and 35 Customers from those tapes. The point is, your analogy is not at all far-fetched, it actually happened to me!

Luckily, I didn't even know about their illegal subsidiary and only visited it when I was hungry. But, upon asking, I was told the tape containing me buying Tacos cannot be erased or sealed, my Privacy, in this instance, will be forever invaded. This is why these EDRs are such a problem. Write in and voice your opposition!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[70Sixter]

This link and some from the site shed some light on what is or might be done.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/08/nhtsa_black_boxes.html

Seems like letters to lawmakers are indeed in order.

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Hi,

WOW! Great analogy! I live in St. Paul/ Mpls. and on the West Side of St. Paul (the historical Mexican Community), there used to be this terrific Taco Van. One of my best friends is of Mexican decent and grew up in that neighborhood and we used to go all the time to get our Tacos there - Best in the City!

Anyway, I used to belong to a Thursday Night Poker Game frequented by several St. Paul Cops, a couple from the Narc and Vice Squads. One Thurs. one of them said "You know, we got you on a Surveillance Tape last week..." Surprised I asked why and he said that the Taco Van was a front for a Cocaine Dealer and that they had a surveillance camera on it all week. He then went on to say that it was lucky I didn't ask for a White Bean Taco, the codeword for a Gram of Coke. Said they nabbed the Dealer and 35 Customers from those tapes. The point is, your analogy is not at all far-fetched, it actually happened to me!

Luckily, I didn't even know about their illegal subsidiary and only visited it when I was hungry. But, upon asking, I was told the tape containing me buying Tacos cannot be erased or sealed, my Privacy, in this instance, will be forever invaded. This is why these EDRs are such a problem. Write in and voice your opposition!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

OK, so you bought a hot dog, and they have you on "tape". So what? How is your privacy invaded? And, if you did order the "white bean taco" and they handed you a gram of cocaine, would you have taken it? I don't think so.

[eslai]

This will be great because then we can get rid of photo-enforced intersections--just put a transponder in each of these black boxes that gets tripped whenever you run a red light and base a ticket on that! Saves money and generates revenue! Yay!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by bmussatti

OK, so you bought a hot dog, and they have you on "tape". So what? How is your privacy invaded? And, if you did order the "white bean taco" and they handed you a gram of cocaine, would you have taken it? I don't think so.

Hi,

You seem to be missing the point here. It's not the fact that I am on Tape, it's that I am on a Gov't. Tape as a potential Bad Guy and without my prior knowledge or consent. There doesn't have to be any more material damage than that.

I went to buy some food, a normal, legal, everyday activity. I have the right to expect that my Gov't. isn't watching my day-to-day activities. Sure, if I went to a McDonald's or Supermarket, I could just as easily ended up on tape, but, these establishments post a notice (albeit often in an inconspicuous place) that there is surveillance and I can choose whether or not I want to patronize them. And, they are not the Gov't., that's a Big distinction. I don't own McDonald's or the Supermarket, but I am one of the owners of my Gov't. and Country.

The Right to Privacy was not given to me. As confirmed by the Founding Fathers, this Right is inalienable and is mine simply because I exist here as a Citizen. It cannot be Granted, I own this Right. It cannot be taken away, unless I (or a majority of my fellow citizens) agree to relinquish it. In the case of the EDRs, I choose not to relinquish it! At least without voicing my opposition and doing all I can to oppose it.

I am not satisfied that this technology is needed to either make my life better or safer. It doesn't prevent a guy from speeding and running me down in a Crosswalk, it merely records the fact that he did. Is this justification enough? Well, most drivers will stop and for those who Hit-and-Run? Well, they catch waay more of them than get away, so I don't see the benefit. Could there be some benefits? Perhaps. But, I feel the detriments outweigh the benefits by a long shot...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

PS As to your query would I accept the White Bean Taco? No! Twenty years ago...???

[BuffaloBoxster]

Those of you in the US who think this is a good idea should move to another country.

I don't want to "stir the pot" and invoke a bunch of emotions, but I would gladly give up some privacy to still see the World Trade Center standing in New York.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by bmussatti

OK, maybe I'm naive, but why should I care about someone knowing were I am and how I got there?

Hi,

Your cavalier attitude towards this is quite a surprise to me. You should care because it is your responsibility as a citizen to jealously defend the rights so many people who have gone before both strove and fought for.

True, it may not affect you, but you don't have the right to surrender it on behalf of others.

All intrusions into personal liberties have begun under the guise of something good such as Public Safety. Even the Nazi persecution of the Jews, Gypsies, Clergy, Handicapped and Homosexuals began as an interpretation of their existing legal system. That's how it took hold - it was sanctioned in Law.

And, both the Times and the Public are fickle, that is what may seem warranted today may be unecessary or unwise in the future. Take the Volstead Act (Prohibition) as an example.

I personally believe the country would be better off with a Ban on Handguns, that they do more Bad than Good. But in a discussion with a like-minded friend a few weekends back, I actually defended the practice.

My friend cited that the right to bear arms stemmed from the fact that at the time, the British had been comandeering homes and property at will and that citizens needed to defend them. But, he stated that this time had passed and therefore the need for bearing arms had become obsolete.

I argued that while he was essentially correct, that we no longer need to defend our homes and property from the govenment. But, what of the future? Who can say that this need won't arise at some future time? I believe that troublesome as this right to bear arms is in current times, that abolishing it would be even worse.

The same holds true of the fundamental right to privacy. In my lifetime, this right has been chipped away, slowly. I didn't need a Social Security Card as a kid, only when I enetered the Workforce. The Gov't. didn't access my Bank data to insure I was paying my Taxes, the Gov't. trusted it's citizens to rightfully support the Country. I didn't spend on average 6 hrs a day on some video camera somewhere. And, none of these things has made the country either better, or safer. No Privacy issues have been added, only taken away. This is another example which could have far reaching consequences, not only for Driving, but perhaps in many other facets of everyday life.

Suppose the Gov't. were to mandate EDRs in Refrigerators which read the bar codes of all the groceries you buy? Now suppose this data were accessed to determine what Social Security or Medicare benfits you should receive? You bought too much Bacon - sorry, Medicare won't cover any Cardiac, Stroke, or Circulatory medications or therapies because you did it to yourself! And, as these EDRs become more commonplace, the Gov't. won't even ask your permission anymore.

NO - Government does not have the right to usurp your liberties! And for what? So some Corporations can make more profit?

They get away with it because people are either too apothetic or too stupid to to realize the implications both near and long-term and fight for these rights. Once they're taken away, it will be near impossible to get them back!

What we need is to kick Socials Studies out of all the school ciricullums and reinstate Civics or Government Classes as a requirement. Chr*st, the people who best know how this country and government works are the immigrants trying to become citizens, they need to pass a test.

This is a bad piece of legislation and we should all take the time to write and oppose it. The Motoring Public has done quite nicely in the past 100 years without EDRs. It is an intrusion, it will up the price of vehicles, and it's only purpose is to make more profit for Corporations and allow the Gov't. to keep closer tabs on you, whether you're one of the Bad Guys or not!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

Just imagine the hayday the insurance companies will have with this information...

"Dear Sir:

Due to information recorded on your black box, we have determined that it is not in the best interest of our shareholders to insure your Porsche Boxster. The data reflects that you exceeded the speed limit on 219 occurrences in the past 12 months.

Sincerely,

State Farm Insurance Companies"

And Randall, imagine the following letter another customer may receive:


"Dear Sir:

Due to information recorded on your black box, we have determined that you will receive a 15% 'Good Driving Discount' for your Porsche Boxster. The data reflects that you have been an excellent driver in the past 12 months.

Sincerely,

State Farm Insurance Companies"

I can go both ways!

[JackG]

Originally Posted by bmussatti

And Randall, imagine the following letter another customer may receive:


"Dear Sir:

Due to information recorded on your black box, we have determined that you will receive a 15% 'Good Driving Discount' for your Porsche Boxster. The data reflects that you have been an excellent driver in the past 12 months.

Sincerely,

State Farm Insurance Companies"

I can go both ways!

Problem with this whole scenario is that it depends on speed alone as being an indication of whether or not one is a safe driver.

Some of the worst drivers I've ever witnessed were also the slowest ones. Speed is not a reliable indicator, but it is one that will be misused if this ever really happens.

[Bob O]

The potential intrusion into my activity by this device is totally unacceptable. I'm not doing anything illegal or untoward, but,,, even if I were.........its none of their (the government OR any private concern) business where I go or how I get there, unless they have a warrant for it . The constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable search and seizures, and the issuance of a warrant before either a search or a seizure can occur. And this appears, to me anyway, ultimately, to be a search, and a seizure, conducted by the government. (Amendment IV of the Bill of Rights)

So.. if the government wants to go to a judge and get a warrant for each and every car they want information from, then go ahead. THEN it might be legal. IMHO....layman's opinion.

A little disagreement........Speaking of the constitution.....I have to disagree slightly with MNboxster. The constitution, and the bill of rights, don't explicitly guarantee the right to privacy. (Go read, or remember if you're old enough , the transcripts of the Bork Supreme Court hearings if you think otherwise, or those of any of several other recent nominees.) The inalienable rights you're referring to are "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ", not privacy. I've had this discussion with several attorney friends........and they agree, rather adamantly in fact, that the right to privacy doesn't exist, explicitly anyway, and questionably in the abstract. Hence, the occasional "discussion" in congress about this issue. It generally comes up in Supreme Court nominee hearings.

And on a similar note, the taping of the taco drug dealer was most certainly done with a warrant, and you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong trime. Why would you feel intruded upon in this situation? You were taped buying a taco, by a legal surveillence. They weren't interested in YOU,, they were interested in the taco stand and its drug dealing customers. You didn't buy any drugs from him, as evidenced by the tape, which, in and of itself clears you of any illegal activity. Yes, you are on tape, but, fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your point of view I guess, it was legal. Was it disturbing to find out you were on a surveillence tape??? SURE!!!!! BUT... what if your friends hadn't told you? (hmmmm if a tree falls in the forest....) You'd be none the wiser, and nothing, absolutely nothing, would result from it, as is the case now. Forgive me, but, personally, I'd forget about it, or tell a really interesting story to the grandkids. (oops.. sorry. I forget, everyone isn't as,, ummmm "experienced" as I am)

I absolutely agree with you that we have to defend to the utmost, our rights and liberties. They have been won, and kept, with blood and honor over several hundred years, and its our responsibility to keep those rights and liberties as envisoned by Thomas Jefferson, et al. And this black box proposal is certainly a case of potential intrusion on both of those guarantees. It is, as someone stated, a slippery slope we've undertaken here and its best not to put a foot on it, lest we find ourselves at the bottom of the hill.

I'm sure the attorneys out there will have differing, and certainly more studied, opinions

Bob

Not looking for a fight.. just an observation or two

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Bob O

...A little disagreement........Speaking of the constitution.....I have to disagree slightly with MNboxster. The constitution, and the bill of rights, don't explicitly guarantee the right to privacy. (Go read, or remember if you're old enough , the transcripts of the Bork Supreme Court hearings if you think otherwise, or those of any of several other recent nominees.) The inalienable rights you're referring to are "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ", not privacy. I've had this discussion with several attorney friends........and they agree, rather adamantly in fact, that the right to privacy doesn't exist, explicitly anyway, and questionably in the abstract. Hence, the occasional "discussion" in congress about this issue. It generally comes up in Supreme Court nominee hearings.

And on a similar note, the taping of the taco drug dealer was most certainly done with a warrant, and you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong trime. Why would you feel intruded upon in this situation? You were taped buying a taco, by a legal surveillence. They weren't interested in YOU,, they were interested in the taco stand and its drug dealing customers. You didn't buy any drugs from him, as evidenced by the tape, which, in and of itself clears you of any illegal activity. Yes, you are on tape, but, fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your point of view I guess, it was legal. Was it disturbing to find out you were on a surveillence tape??? SURE!!!!! BUT... what if your friends hadn't told you? (hmmmm if a tree falls in the forest....) You'd be none the wiser, and nothing, absolutely nothing, would result from it, as is the case now. Forgive me, but, personally, I'd forget about it, or tell a really interesting story to the grandkids. (oops.. sorry. I forget, everyone isn't as,, ummmm "experienced" as I am)


Bob

Not looking for a fight.. just an observation or two

Hi,

You're absolutely correct. Law Enforcement had prior permission in the form of a warrant to do what they did. I merely recounted the story to show how an innocent person can end up on the bad end of a stick through no fault of their own. That a device like this further increases that potential, such as only the car, not the driver is identified, but the owner would be cited.

But what if a tree falls in the forest... Scenario: I'm looking for a Gov't. job, or any job for that matter. Someone sees this tape and is acquainted with the person who decides whether I get it or not. He casually says "I saw that guy on a Drug Surveillance tape..." Farfetched? Perhaps, but stranger things have happened.

This EDR device will increase this potential, to say nothing of simple error. Suppose your insurance is denied because of faulty information derived from one of these boxes? Ever try to fix an error on your Credit Report or Credit Card statement? Will we now have to audit the files kept to insure that it contains no errors? How do we prove that we weren't going such and such speed on such and such day and time - 6 mos. ago? We're soon going to have to spend all our leisure time making sure that our lives as represented in the various data banks truly reflect who we are...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Grizzly]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

But How do we prove that we weren't going such and such speed on such and such day and time - 6 mos. ago?

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

... but your Honor, I couldn't possibly have been speeding in that part of St. Paul on that date and time. I was clear across town buying dope at a Taco Van. I can prove it! Here's the tape!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Grizzly

... but your Honor, I couldn't possibly have been speeding in that part of St. Paul on that date and time. I was clear across town buying dope at a Taco Van. I can prove it! Here's the tape!

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99