Disturbing information about new cars

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Furyline
zomg, my car has electronic components in it? and they communicate with each other? and these communications can easily be saved? oh noes big brother!!!!!!!!!111

If you're an idiot you might think along those lines.

If you're a little more intelligent you might see a deeper issue involving the right to you data and the implications related to the data's usage.

Here's a situation for you:

What if we're both speeding, we collide, and I blame you for the accident. Speed is suspected to be the cause of the accident. Your car contains a data recorder, which accurately shows that you were speeding, whereas mine does not. I lie and say that I was going the speed limit.

When the data is retrieved, only you can be proven to have been speeding. There is not enough information to prove that I did anything illegal. In that situation, the recorder was a liability to you because it gave me an upper hand in the dispute. You look like cause of the accident since it's been proven that you were speeding. The lack of data was an advantage for me.

Was it fair that in the court case, your data recorder revealed all the mistakes that you made, while I'm subject to no such scrutiny? Sounds like my lawyer could pick you apart and have the evidence to make a case. Yours won't have that luxury.

 

[Furyline]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Furyline
zomg, my car has electronic components in it? and they communicate with each other? and these communications can easily be saved? oh noes big brother!!!!!!!!!111

If you're an idiot you might think along those lines.

If you're a little more intelligent you might see a deeper issue involving the right to you data and the implications related to the data's usage.

Here's a situation for you:

What if we're both speeding, we collide, and I blame you for the accident. Speed is suspected to be the cause of the accident. Your car contains a data recorder, which accurately shows that you were speeding, whereas mine does not. I lie and say that I was going the speed limit.

When the data is retrieved, only you can be proven to have been speeding. There is not enough information to prove that I did anything illegal. In that situation, the recorder was a liability to you because it gave me an upper hand in the dispute. You look like cause of the accident since it's been proven that you were speeding. The lack of data was an advantage for me.

Was it fair that in the court case, your data recorder revealed all the mistakes that you made, while I'm subject to no such scrutiny? Sounds like my lawyer could pick you apart and have the evidence to make a case. Yours won't have that luxury.

I would hope that the data recorder is not the only evidence considered in this investigation.
Also, it seems like that would be a pretty good argument to require data recorders in all vehicles.

In my view, this seems like a reasonable step given how advanced cars are and how reliable the data should be. Of course you don't want it recording at all times, but accident data can be used to verify testimony or to help improve safety systems.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I think the current trend is scary. People are no longer concerned about their freedom in the country. They'll see the government taking away someone else's rights, but since it's not something that personally affects them, they don't resist. That is selfish behavior. I'm opposed to the government taking away anyone's rights, even if it doesn't affect me personally. I'm against the very principle of it. This goes far beyond this particular situation.

I know that this is about cars, but the principle is what matters. When I see the government trying to ban guns, I see people saying that it's ok since they don't own guns. When the government tries to crack down on the free press, people are ok with it since they're not a member of the press and they didn't agree with that the press was saying at the time. When the government brands someone a "terrorist" and strips away their right to a trial, people are ok with it since they're not being branded a terrorist, yet.

There's a little story that this reminds me of.

"They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. . . . Then they came for me, and by that time, nobody was left to speak up"

This post also reminds of a little saying that I believe is attributed to Benjamin Franklin - and I may not get it exactly right, so stuff it

Those who would sacrifice freedom for safety deserve neither. Welcome to the United State of Apathy


Oh yea
/me pets his EDR-less 1988 Accord

 

[Ilikepiedoyou]

how can it record ten seconds before an accident?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Atheus
2 problems I can see. 1 - you might have made some small error, but the crash was still the other driver's fault. Would you forfeit your rights because you were committing a crime at the time of the accident? 2 - You could just hack the black box to always report that you are innocent of everything.

Investigator plugs in blackbox, retreives Data, message shows up on screen: "The Dude is innocent, you must acquit!"