[soundbyte]

deepsand, on 23 April 2012 - 10:40 PM, said:

Proof, including details re. data sampled, data sampling rates, data packet sizes, and data storage capacity, required.

When I first heard of this technology a few years ago, I remember it being said that there would be many driving behaviors measured, from breaking and acceleration patterns, to the number of miles driven in a given time frame, to the use of the turn signal and seat belts. While all of these may be important considerations, you just know that the insurance companies are going to use the data to determine rates, amount of coverage, and whether or not they pay on a claim. And for people who see this as an innocuous thing that can make us all safer, just remember, 15 years ago who knew that your credit report and possibly your health information could be reviewed by potential employers. Proof isn't necessary, just a statistical pattern that falls outside a company's risk management policy.

[soundbyte]

deepsand, on 23 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

soundbyte, on 23 April 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

I think I saw this coming a few years ago when I heard this news blurb about this monitoring technology that you simply plug in....useful in getting insurance discounts, ie. the new Progressive snapshot commercial.

Gonna be tough doing rating based on data from only a brief event time window.

...not if you measure several things frequently. Remember, the Insurance company is a business that exists to make money. If they can limit their liability to only "safe bets" they can maximize profits from the payment of premiums and investments, and minimize exposure to liability by jacking the rates up on someone they profile to be a risk or cancelling coverage altogether.

[soundbyte]

Tinman1957, on 21 April 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

deepsand, on 21 April 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Off-topic & speculative.

And you didn't speculate anything in any of your post did you? I think I understand now, Deepsand, you're just a troll looking for anyone with a different idea than "thou". You automatically label them as false, speculative, etc.
I won't debate you on this matter anymore, got better things to do than argue with a troll....

I'm with you. I too lack the ability to breathe the rarified air of a self-appointed moderator of this discussion. I have limited patience for elitist snobs who, rather than listening to a range of opinions, talk down to the folks who have to live with these incremental and progressive intrusions on our privacy and freedom.

[soundbyte]

databaseben, on 21 April 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

rkinne01, on 21 April 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

KevinBtu7s, on 20 April 2012 - 10:31 PM, said:

rkinne01, on 20 April 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:

When I get one of these cars first thing I'd do is disable, hack or remove the blackbox. Problem solved.

Chances are the gov't, attorney demands if not just the car companies themselves will intergrate them into the vehicle so that the vehicle won't operate without them in place and functional. Rip it out and the vehicle becomes a four-thousand pound paper weight! Watch and see.

You're likely right, here's hoping hackers come up with a way to get around it all.

Ultimately, the state's will get on the band wagon and ensure auto's have a working black box installed before issuing the yearly inspection sticker.

Have great faith in the American Hacker ...

[Scunnerous]

Raymond823, on 20 April 2012 - 12:11 PM, said:

These concerns are not "largely" irrelevant, they are completely irrelevant. These are not GPS devices. They are used to gain information after a collision, and if you think it is your god given right to lie about how a fatal collision occurred, you are sadly mistaken. "I was only going 55 mph." No, you were going 90, and the people you killed are entitled to justice. Why doesn't everyone stop acting like it's their right to endanger the public and that law enforcement should be hamstrung when it comes to investigating possible criminal behavior. The article doesn't even address the technical aspects of the devices and incorrectly states that EDRs would make it easier to track a vehicle. EDR's have no such capability. They record aspects of the car's operation: e.g., speed, acceleration, yaw, pedal position, braking force, etc. Get your paranoid head out of your ass.

Hmm, the old "speed kills" red herring taken to the next extreme step. So the guy who is over the speed limit -- and who isn't -- is going to be penalized over the fool who can't or won't use his mirrors and thinks that driving only requires 50% or less of their attention. That's without considering the accuracy of the devices in any given situation - uhh, wheels can spin faster when contact with the road is lost... by a lot. People have already been convicted on this false reading from an ECU due to aquaplaning. You say that these are not GPS devices but there's not a single reason to believe that can't or won't be, as required by some head-nodder/finger-wagger. Change your hyperbolic 90 to just 80 on a freeway and you're talking abut a large percentage of drivers right now. Slow-pokes, ditherers and lane-darters cause as many, if not more, accidents than fast, competent drivers... but this device has a single target. As for "right to endanger the public" and "criminal behavior", get your sanctimonious head, etc. etc......

[soundbyte]

waldojim, on 20 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

FocusDrivingSch, on 20 April 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

If you have nothing to hide, therefore , there is nothing to fear ? Any device that protects us from each other has thumbs up from me !

I am sure that is what the Germans said too. "I am not a Jew, I have nothing to hide."

...So, you would probably be thrilled with a monitoring device on your tooth brush to ensure you are brushing three times a day thereby reducing air pollution and potential long-term healthcare costs...

[Scunnerous]

shanedr, on 20 April 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

jbkraut, on 20 April 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Absurd. Now I cannot go anywhere without being followed by big brother. This will also no allow my insurance company access. BAD IDEA.

Black boxes in vehicles would be used just like the black boxes in aircraft - when there is a crash. You are confusing black boxes with a GPS that would broadcast your position. Something law enforcement would like but no one else. Stop jumping to conclusions.

A GPS does not "broadcast" anything - it's only a receiver type device. You're confusing with GPS trackers, which can send position information through some kind of cellular phone or FM radio sideband link.

[Evildave]

Actually, any GPS or location enabled device with a network connection of any kind IS a tracker. The wireless carrier records that information passively, ALL THE TIME.

In fact, any device that merely sends out a unique ID (i.e. Bluetooth or WiFi) can be tracked, too, only somewhat less conveniently. It's how stores 'follow' people with cell phones in their pockets. They don't have an agreement with the wireless company. The phone is emitting a digital signal with a unique ID over and over again, wherever you go. They simply listen to it.

Smart phones practically all have 'location' enabled, whether you disable it for your apps, or not, and follow every step you take with it in your pocket or purse. They all got caught, and the wireless network providers simply added this to your terms of service. You agreed to have your movements tracked and logged, in order to activate that phone.

Cars with 'OnStar' like functionality are the same thing. Getting OnStar NOT TO track you, even if you're not paying to have it activated, is a hassle. How much storage to log a car's VIN and position every minute for a year?

ICBM Address: 36.8274040 N, 108.0204086 W
Time: 201204241841
VIN: FJKL19862004380

Call it a generous 64 bytes, if completely in ASCII (though in binary, it would be about 32 bytes).

36.8274040 N, 108.0204086 W, 201204241841, FJKL19862004380
525960 minuts in a year, times 64 = 3,3661,440 bytes

So a million cars can be tracked in less than 4TB of data (given an absurdly generous 64 byte record size, and minute resolution). That's $180 worth of storage for you or me. For a big old corporate storage center, that kind of capacity is chump change.

A lot less space, if the resolution is down to one sample every several minutes, and is packed more tightly in a binary format, and doesn't record duplicate positions (i.e., if the phone or car hasn't moved more than ten feet, don't send a 'duplicate' record).

Just replace VIN with 'cell phone ID', if you like.

And that data is valuable. Police forces want it to see where your car has been, or YOU have been. They didn't have to attach anything to you or your vehicle. You voluntarily carried it. They didn't need a warrant. You consented to the corporation recording your movements 24/7, AND 'sharing' that information.

Other corporations would love to know where you drive, where you walk, when. You agreed to let the wireless carrier or 'onstar' or whatever 'share' it with partners. Practically every car dealer in your city knows your car's VIN. They recorded it when you bought it. It's 'shared among partners' as part of your loan or lease documents, including your SSAN. They all start pestering you in the last year of your lease or loan contract. Your cellular carrier also has your SSAN and credit info. All of this can be cross-referenced.

So they can watch every step you take, and every plastic transaction you make. Your credit card banks and bank 'share' information with 'partners', too, after all.

Big Brother Wuvs Yoo.

[waldojim]

soundbyte, on 24 April 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

waldojim, on 20 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

FocusDrivingSch, on 20 April 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

If you have nothing to hide, therefore , there is nothing to fear ? Any device that protects us from each other has thumbs up from me !

I am sure that is what the Germans said too. "I am not a Jew, I have nothing to hide."

...So, you would probably be thrilled with a monitoring device on your tooth brush to ensure you are brushing three times a day thereby reducing air pollution and potential long-term healthcare costs...

I think you misunderstood the purpose of my post. Read the original, the reply, then your nonsense. Apply common sense.

[deepsand]

soundbyte, on 24 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

deepsand, on 23 April 2012 - 10:40 PM, said:

Proof, including details re. data sampled, data sampling rates, data packet sizes, and data storage capacity, required.

When I first heard of this technology a few years ago, I remember it being said that there would be many driving behaviors measured, from breaking and acceleration patterns, to the number of miles driven in a given time frame, to the use of the turn signal and seat belts. While all of these may be important considerations, you just know that the insurance companies are going to use the data to determine rates, amount of coverage, and whether or not they pay on a claim. And for people who see this as an innocuous thing that can make us all safer, just remember, 15 years ago who knew that your credit report and possibly your health information could be reviewed by potential employers. Proof isn't necessary, just a statistical pattern that falls outside a company's risk management policy.

Proof of your claim is required.

As for "insurance companies are going to use the data to determine ... whether or not they pay on a claim," as earlier noted, this specious claim is based on a lack of understanding of Contract Law in General, and Insurance Law in particular.

[deepsand]

soundbyte, on 24 April 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

deepsand, on 23 April 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

soundbyte, on 23 April 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

I think I saw this coming a few years ago when I heard this news blurb about this monitoring technology that you simply plug in....useful in getting insurance discounts, ie. the new Progressive snapshot commercial.

Gonna be tough doing rating based on data from only a brief event time window.

...not if you measure several things frequently. Remember, the Insurance company is a business that exists to make money. If they can limit their liability to only "safe bets" they can maximize profits from the payment of premiums and investments, and minimize exposure to liability by jacking the rates up on someone they profile to be a risk or cancelling coverage altogether.

Still waiting for you to provide details re. data sampled, data sampling rates, data packet sizes, and data storage capacity.

As for how the insurance industry works, you're preaching to one who knows it from the inside, one who can say, without fear of being in error, that you are quite mistaken with regards to the ability of an insurer to be arbitrary, capricious and/or discriminatory.

[deepsand]

soundbyte, on 24 April 2012 - 12:17 PM, said:

Tinman1957, on 21 April 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

deepsand, on 21 April 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Off-topic & speculative.

And you didn't speculate anything in any of your post did you? I think I understand now, Deepsand, you're just a troll looking for anyone with a different idea than "thou". You automatically label them as false, speculative, etc.
I won't debate you on this matter anymore, got better things to do than argue with a troll....

I'm with you. I too lack the ability to breathe the rarified air of a self-appointed moderator of this discussion. I have limited patience for elitist snobs who, rather than listening to a range of opinions, talk down to the folks who have to live with these incremental and progressive intrusions on our privacy and freedom.

The purpose of moderators is not to defend those who hold that their unsubstantiated opinions are the equal of fact.

[deepsand]

soundbyte, on 24 April 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

waldojim, on 20 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

FocusDrivingSch, on 20 April 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

If you have nothing to hide, therefore , there is nothing to fear ? Any device that protects us from each other has thumbs up from me !

I am sure that is what the Germans said too. "I am not a Jew, I have nothing to hide."

...So, you would probably be thrilled with a monitoring device on your tooth brush to ensure you are brushing three times a day thereby reducing air pollution and potential long-term healthcare costs...

So, now you've resorted to misrepresenting the statements of others so as to construct straw men.

Hoping to become a journeyman sophist, are you?

[gdltek1]

mjd420nova, on 21 April 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

The lane became clogged by a dark blue Crown Victoria.

Shouldn't that have been your first clue? In my experience, the only people who drive Crown Vic's are law enforcement, taxis, and the elderly. So if they didn't have blue hair or a turban, common sense says you probably should have kept your "salute" stowed.

[waldojim]

gdltek1, on 24 April 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:

mjd420nova, on 21 April 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

The lane became clogged by a dark blue Crown Victoria.

Shouldn't that have been your first clue? In my experience, the only people who drive Crown Vic's are law enforcement, taxis, and the elderly. So if they didn't have blue hair or a turban, common sense says you probably should have kept your "salute" stowed.

I happen to like the Crown Vic... namely because black, or white Vics, with steelies, keep morons at bay!

[FrederickCrane]

These devices seem harmless at first glance. they do not contain gps and they're only accessible by the owner. Of course, that's always how the cessation of rights begins...a foot in the door. Two years later, GPS is added as an extra feature-easy enough. An amendment that will get far less attention from a bill already passed. Then there's the passport issue. When rights are taken aways, the tendency is for it to be done incrementally. This is the start of that snow ball. We should remember those who came before us. The lessons of history are easy if you chose to read them. Almost never were rights ripped away save after a time of war. It's always been a little here, a little there. Just like [censored] Germany. 6 years before war, a few things at a time began the separation of Jews from the rest of German society. Only after their complete relegation years later were they camped. I believe it began with a listing of their assets and restriction of their travel. I cannot in good conscience go along with this bill.

[deepsand]

FrederickCrane, on 20 June 2012 - 12:19 PM, said:

These devices seem harmless at first glance. they do not contain gps and they're only accessible by the owner. Of course, that's always how the cessation of rights begins...a foot in the door. Two years later, GPS is added as an extra feature-easy enough. An amendment that will get far less attention from a bill already passed. Then there's the passport issue.

Passport issue?

FrederickCrane, on 20 June 2012 - 12:19 PM, said:

When rights are taken aways, the tendency is for it to be done incrementally

It should be noted that driving is, not a right, but a privilege, a distinction of import here.