To: upchuck
tbh I’m not against this. It would be very difficult for a criminal to use this to know if you’re not home. I’m not sure that the protocols even allow for knowing the specific vehicle. This is about reducing crashes and improving traffic efficiency.
If you like sitting at red lights when nobody is coming on the green light then fine but I personally would rather have those days (accumulative minutes) of my life back.
OnStar is not so different in terms of being able to track you.
19 posted on
07/04/2015 2:38:06 PM PDT by
fuzzylogic
(welfare state = sharing consequences of poor moral choices among everybody)
To: fuzzylogic
“OnStar is not so different in terms of being able to track you.”
Oh yes it is. It isn’t vehicle to vehicle. As for this being “difficult for criminals to use,” get serious. Just look at what the Chinks just took from us.
To: fuzzylogic
If you like sitting at red lights when nobody is coming on the green light then fine but I personally would rather have those days (accumulative minutes) of my life back. In which dream world are you living? Traffic lights can already tell if no cars are approaching or running through the intersection on the cross streets; but they STILL give you the long red just the same. Adding RF to the mix will just allow the traffic light controllers to ignore more data.
Be smart, resist BIG BROTHER.
31 posted on
07/04/2015 2:55:07 PM PDT by
GingisK
To: fuzzylogic
You can always pull the fuse to the OnStar system, but just like with airbags, the government will probably make it a crime to disconnect this new “feature” which will be declared to be “for safety”.
To: fuzzylogic
tbh Im not against this. It would be very difficult for a criminal to use this to know if youre not home. Im not sure that the protocols even allow for knowing the specific vehicle. This is about reducing crashes and improving traffic efficiency. There are valid technical reasons for why this would be a good thing. There are valid technical reasons for why this would also be a bad thing.
Given the tendency of things to slew towards fascism, this will also be made to slew towards fascism if it ever gets its foot in the door.
The Democrats will come along and say "We already have the equipment in the vehicles, we are just seeking to implement it more fully. "
To: fuzzylogic
If you like sitting at red lights when nobody is coming on the green light then fine but I personally would rather have those days (accumulative minutes) of my life back.How does this system change that?
40 posted on
07/04/2015 3:03:32 PM PDT by
raybbr
(Obamacare needs a deatha panels.)
To: fuzzylogic
"This is about reducing crashes and improving traffic efficiency."
How?
"If you like sitting at red lights when nobody is coming on the green light then fine but I personally would rather have those days (accumulative minutes) of my life back."
If one can run a red light, all can run red lights.
Show us a good use for the new technology--a use that isn't too trivial.
For commonly unsafe, narcoleptic drivers, safety radar works at short range in real time without using or storing information about a driver's speed or location, but I don't even need that.
54 posted on
07/04/2015 3:37:19 PM PDT by
familyop
(We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
To: fuzzylogic
Even safety radar has a hole, BTW. Not every vehicle broadcasts a signal. Safety radar can lead to complacency for drivers who are not alert.
As for the new technology, see my
comment #49. A vehicle with the new technology installed (as per the article above this thread) and turned on while running a red light won't have a roll cage. Others will in the near future (see open source equipment design, open source vehicle, open source car, fire resistant crush barriers and restraints in lieu of helmets).
New vehicles from global corporates are overly expensive, of poor quality and good for little but a rent-seekers' economy. They support the regime of artificial scarcity and frequent, high-cost, unnecessarily complicated maintenance.
Build something for surveillance, nerds can turn it off in their own vehicles and watch vehicles of trespassers from afar. Is that really what gadget-loving, technically retarded "professionals" really want? All of the computers, robots, patents, etc., are belong to us. Low-techs will rule.
63 posted on
07/04/2015 3:52:13 PM PDT by
familyop
(We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
To: fuzzylogic
You are true to your ‘name”
So let’s have it be voluntary - and you get your tracker-car and leave us our own choice?
93 posted on
07/04/2015 8:56:21 PM PDT by
maine-iac7
(Christians are as Christians do. By their fruits...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson