I work in this industry...you can imply I’ve no clue if you want but 40000 road deaths a year is no joke. Also remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.
This isn’t being done to track you. None of us want that and we have the same privacy concerns. Security is taken very seriously, these are complex systems and security is considered at every level.
I understand the concerns but this will save lives and all the car makers are on this path. It is coming.
How many of you have a smartphone?? You should be far more worried about that. What does Apple do that you don’t know about?? Don’t get me started with Google.
Okay, but your original comment was about your perceived waste of seconds, that add up to hours over your lifetime, at red lights with no one coming in the cross direction.
No, it's a right, not a privilege. The freedom to use the public roads is a right that goes back before the Roman Empire.
"Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience. - Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago, 169 NE 22 ("Regulated" here means traffic safety enforcement, stop lights, signs, etc. NOT a privilege that requires permission i.e.- licensing, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, etc.)This isn’t being done to track you."The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."- Thompson v Smith, 154 SE 579.
"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." - Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.
"...completely within the protection of the Constitution as the... liberty to go when and where one will." Coppage v. Kansas, 236 U.S. 1, at 14, 23-24 (1915).
"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the l4th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293.
This isn’t currently being done to track you, but it is axiomatic that it will lay the groundwork for that purpose as well.
How many of you have a smartphone?? You should be far more worried about that. What does Apple do that you don’t know about?? Don’t get me started with Google.
Skynet isn't going to be a run amok machine or even a collection of them. It's going to be a massive network of interconnected electronic leashes and enforcers doing the will of a ruling elite and in accordance with their whims.
“This isn’t being done to track you. None of us want that and we have the same privacy concerns. Security is taken very seriously, these are complex systems and security is considered at every level.”
You live in la la land if you think this won’t ultimately be used against the citizens of this country. Basically, you’re a Socialist who thinks the government has the “right” to do this for “some social purpose.” We got a FasTrak for bridge tolls. Now the tell us that “they are going to track our movements with it so they can figure out traffic patterns” Yeah, right. So if you want to “opt out,” you have to put the damned thing in an anti-stat bag so they can’t ping it. With this proposal, it’s unlikely that you will be able to “opt out.” As we are now told that the crash sensor that triggers your alr bag records any number of parameters like vehicle speed an g-forces prior to and “event,” and that information “belongs” not to you, but to the government and it can be used against you in a court of law. Somewhere, the’ve left the 5th Amendment out of their thinking. So much for Constitutional Government, when it’s out there with guys like you saving us from ourselves. So for what it’s worth, decent people need to expose people like you and your “do-gooder buddies” at NHTSA or whatever government bureaucratic $hit hole you hang your hat! You are part of the problem today, not a solution!
With all due respect, if I want privacy I can put my smartphone in a shielded bag, but government is going to treat my car’s broadcast of its ID as a matter of safety and it will be a crime to disable it, just as it is a crime for the tire shop to leave out the TPM (tire pressure monitor) the next time the tires are changed.
Just take a simple issue like being able to disconnect your front passenger air bag. There is a government form with severe criminal sanction of 18 USC 1001 if you check the wrong box:
“Part F. Certification
I certify to the U.S. Department of Transportation that the information, certifications, and understandings given or indicated by me on this form are truthful, correct, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. I recognize that the statements I have made on this form concern a matter within the jurisdiction of a department of the United States and that making a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement may render me subject to criminal prosecution under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001.”
As to tracking, I don’t believe that is the motivation of the engineers or the auto companies, but that could be the very same thing we would expect the engineers at Motorola or AT & T to say when they were developing the cell phone. And we know how that turned out.
You don’t hesitate to use the government’s own destruction of the Fourth Amendment as the reason why I should not worry that someone very soon will not develop the “Stingray” cell phone spoofer equivalent of a Stingray for spoofing passing vehicles into spilling their guts to the device.
And recall that law enforcement has vigorous denied that there was such as thing as a Stingray.
Now with a cell phone, we could have preserved our privacy had the manufacturers not acceded to government’s demand that all phones be trackable all the time. We could have just had a “reveal location” button so disclosure would have been off by default. But no, disclosure of location is continuous and mandatory and now nobody can opt out.
I return to my original suggestion. If the designers of this new vehicle location system are being honest about preserving privacy, let us see the steps they are taking. Let us not make silly design mistakes that open gaping holes for Stingrays to penetrate. One way to do this is to give each vehicle’s ID only a limited lifetime, where it comes up with a new random number frequent enough to preclude government from tracking my drive down the interstate.
Let this device save lives, but not at the expense of liberty. Careful and honest engineers can design with both concerns in mind. I have options in my life. I can always rebuild my existing vehicles. Government is not going to destroy their utility. Too many poor illegal immigrants to pander to.
I implied no such thing. I am an embedded hardware/software engineer with 43 years of experience. (I'm 65) I've been around the block quite a few times.
My issue is with over-automation. Windows just crawls, stays busy picking its own butt, and has more bugs than the beach has grains of sand. There is too much RF in the ambient environment; and, there are a lot of cars to add to that tangle. I have seen many problems get much worse when a lot of software is thrown at them. Programmers really aren't bright enough to field woefully complex stuff when life safety is a primary issue.
Reliability will be a serious issue with automation, particularly in the beginning. I'm not wild about trusting my car or my neighbors car speed & direction to beta software. Also, now we'll have to wait for the car to boot up and gets its updates while sitting there twiddling our collective thumbs. Oh, did I mention how difficult it will be to get meaningful service for such systems? Will the service shops have simulators or test roads with lots of traffic on them in order to verify that service was performed correctly?
Why not make drivers' licenses actually mean that the driver was well trained and not just capable of bringing a thermometer to 98.6? That would be an intelligent approach to road safety. I don't think the expensive is going to be the best approach.