one step closer to 1984

[aar0s]

I dont think that they are puting this in mustangs - yet

[aar0s]

try this i wonder what would happen if you were to disconect this black box?

[Mustang Brandon]

glad i have an 89'

[Mr 5 0]

I'm not sure this technology is really so threatening as it is only used in the event of an accident and is not fool-proof, as prosecuters and police admit. It could go either way. Of course, if you regularly speed and have an accident it could nail you, as it did to the old man mentioned in the article who was doing 85 mph when he rear-ended another car. He killed a man and injured two others due to his stupidity and negligence. I can't excuse that. That the black box was able to give validation to what an accident investigator could have proven is a good thing. I don't see that as anything but justice.

If you click the link at the bottom of the article it gives you a pdf that lists the cars using the 'black box'. It's all GM and Ford vehicles but Ford does not include the Mustang...yet.

Drive Safely.

[aar0s]

i agree that in an wreck that the info (if accurate) would be great but ins. companies are useing something similar to this to monitor,at the moment only volunteers. how long until your agent calls you up and tells you to come by the office so he can hook up your box. now im not saying you should drive like a moron but how much is going to be to much. and i would guess if they are in the LS then they may be in the 05 stang.

[hoofprints]

I don't think the boxes are any good for sports car drivers......of course we tend to push the limits, but by God thats why we drive these cars. Sometimes accidents happen and I don't want my version of the accident to be questioned by a piece of technology that may or may not be accurate. Just my opinion....

[Capri306]

Hate to break it to you, but this technology came out a few years ago on Corvettes to stave off warranty claims, which was the original intent. Data logging is becoming increasingly cheaper as memory and technology costs plummet, so an addition like this is no stretch of the imagination. For one, I would be happy as heck if something such as this could be the determining factor to show that I wasn't at fault for an accident in which the citation could go either way. There are some legal and information issues to work out, yes, but look at this quote, and I'll crucify it afterward:

"If you're sliding on ice and you've got your foot on the accelerator, the car thinks that you're going 90 mph, when you could actually be sliding at 10 mph."

This is complete BS. If the car is sliding, the antilock brake or powertrain control module is going to see the differentiation between individual wheel speeds. The days of computers determining vehicle speed by simple propeller shaft speed sensing are OVER, and have been for quite some time, or at least on any of the vehicles to which this data logging would apply. Yet another example of "hillbillies and technology don't mix."

As for ANY argument regarding this as an invasion of privacy? PLEASE!!! Are you not on a public highway virtually the entire time you are driving your vehicle? In the same way you are subject to vehicle searches and "Terry pats," you would/should be subject to vehicle data logging and use of that instrument's information contained therein.

I do, however, take issue with the fact that none of the manufacturers are making clear which vehicles are so equipped. Not that I believe that it would influence my choice of vehicle for purchase, but I would at least like to KNOW if it's equipped with such a device.

As a final point, I think some people are taking this too far. The government isn't tracking you with this, nor does it intend to. All it's designed to do is give authorities some insight as to the conditions leading up to the point of a collision, so don't judge it until it sends someone who didn't deserve it to prison, or (just the opposite) lets the prosecutor put someone away who kills someone in your family. Okay, didn't mean to end this post THAT way, but it's something to think about, eh? Havagooday.

[PKRWUD]

This is just the tip of the iceberg. This technology is being used with GPS units to record driving habits of rental car drivers, giving the rental agencies the ability to fine you for speeding, even if you weren't caught. They can even lock you out of the car if they see fit. There is a local company here in Ventura County that is marketing a black box device for parents to be able to monitor the driving habits of their kids, or anyone else that drives in one of their vehicles. The state of Illinois has a new program in effect that will use the ECM and the "black box" to determine if you've installed illegal parts in the past, and just removed them in order to pass inspection.

It doesn't take much to see where this can and probably will lead. You go to get your mail, and find a speeding ticket because you went over the limit one time last week. I dunno. I can see some benefits to it, but like everything else, the use of this technology won't stop there.

[aar0s]

i still wonder what would happen if it were unhooked.

[DaTank]

Here's another "Black Box" for humans. A Micro chip for humans approved by the FDA. Hopefully you can view this.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...crochips_x.htm

Brad

[Ieatcamaros]

It is just like other things technology produces. It has it's good points and it has it's bad points. If I had a car with it on it, I would be looking for a way to bypass it cause I always drive fast. It would be good for the accidents like the one in the article. But once this thing gets major publicity and it is on every car, police officers will take advantage of the opportunity to nail you for speeding.

[KiltedBanshees93GT]

Originally Posted by Ieatcamaros

But once this thing gets major publicity and it is on every car, police officers will take advantage of the opportunity to nail you for speeding.

This about sums it up, that whole temptation thing. To paraphrase Gandalf: "I would try to do good with it"
Kinda kills the whole "Freedom of the Road" if you have someone watching over your shoulder.
And I can actually see the insurance companies abusing this worse than the gov't would. Thay have less overwatch, and nearly as much money/influence.

Just being my usual paraniod self.
(Your only paranoid if you're wrong)
J

[Mr 5 0]

The 'black box' technology only registers the speed, braking effort, etc when the airbag(s) are deployed, as in an accident. It does not constantly register your speed. While some rental car companies can track your speed and position, it's highly unpopular. I seriously doubt the majority of American drivers will simply roll over quietly and allow this kind of constant-tracking technology to become standard on every vehicle sold (the buyer will be paying for it in higher sticker prices). We've lived without it up to now, accident rates are steadily dropping and there is no demand or real need for a constant-tracking device on every vehicle sold. The current airbag-deployment-triggered devices are more than enough. Going further to track drivers movements, speed, etc will just harrass and really piss off the driving public. Especially me.

[KiltedBanshees93GT]

I agree with the point that currently these "black boxes" that are not in constant operation, can be useful for accident analysis. In that role I would actually agree that they are a good idea.
But once they become more commonplace, it seems natural that they would merge them with the onboard GPS "For a more complete picture...of the accident". (Again, maybe good intentions)
From there, the information that was being tracked could easily come into the possesion of interested third parties. (Corporate psychology: they have information that is currently not of use to them, i.e. you havent been in an accident. Its just sitting there doing nothing, why not find a use for it and make some profit?)
The thing about it is that it could work its way out there without the average consumer knowing just due lack of public awareness/interest. Unless 60 minutes etc. makes note of it, only the "car folks" will be aware and worried. Especially if the mfrs. take the initative, and spin it as a new safety feature.
This just strikes me as one of those things that 5 years down the line people will start to get pissed at, but by then its too late. "Whaddya mean I speed too much!"

Sorry, /rant
J

[Mr 5 0]

I agree with the dangers of this technology being eased into new vehicles to the point where you could be constantly monitored by 'interested parties' . However, I don't believe that the automobile media or the general media would ignore this technological phenomenon...it's too good of a story and the '1984/Big Brother' implications are enough to make even the most liberal journalist salivate. However, he or she would be caught between wanting to promote 'safe driving' via the nanny-like technology and upholding individual freedom. A liberal journalist would probably go for the 'safer roads' justification to promote the installation of the devices on all new cars. The car-lovers magazines, club and marque newsletters as well as driver-oriented radio and TV shows would be against this technology being further expanded, for obvious reasons.

I have no imminent fear of the technology taking over my car but I don't like the implications of it and I resent that technology, a good thing, could eventually be used against automobile drivers. I doubt the manufacturers care all that much about it (except to charge you for it) but insurance companies and to a lesser extent, law enforcement do...or soon will. This bears watching.