Is your car spying on you?

[My 5th]

Originally Posted by AGM 1LE

I hate to say it but I bet OnStar is doing the same damn thing in GM cars, they're just not dumb enough to say it to the press.

I wonder about this too. Last week I was t-boned at an intersection in my SS. Air bags deployed. I've heard other C5 members say ON-Star called them to say they detected an accident. I didn't hear a word from them, but my subscription expired 3 1/2 years ago. Would that be the reason they didn't follow up on my collision?

[Sp00ner]

I think that's a safe bet, the crash response is a big selling point and part of the base package.

[94turbolsx]

I think its almost a guarantee new cars are spying on you, in the same manner smart phones are.

[Neuf Cruz]

Not sure how I feel on this one! I agree that keeping someone from causing someone or themselves serious harm or death is a good thing but the thought that Im being "watched" all the time bothers me. A very large majority of this site is made up of people that like cars and especially performance cars. We do our mods, some race etc... If I feel like hammering it for a few seconds "in a safe place" then I don't want to feel like my dad is driving with me and going to hear about it soon.
I would like to see how some ion here who say hell yes would feel that a ticket was mailed to them every time they did a burnout "illegal start" or it could tell them that your car did not come to a fully complete stop at some stop sign. It could get crazy. Give an inch!

On the fence

Like it for others but maybe not me.

[ZED SLED]

Funny, when I worked in airbag system design, we were able to collect all that data. When we first started working with Ford in the early-mid '90s they made us remove the function from their systems. Their reasoning was if we can see it, so can someone's lawyer. Of course all this was before govt interference.

[The_Blur]

Let's say every car got surveillance. Someone would have to observe all those cars, so a whole lot of people would suddenly have low-paying jobs where all they do is see if someone is speeding or driving against the rules. These people would have the most monotonous, boring jobs out there, and they'd barely be paying their bills. Do you think these guys would produce quality work? Do you think they'd be awesome at stopping people from breaking road rules, or do you think they'd be overwhelmed that almost every driver drives above the speed limit, rolls a stop sign, or fails to use their blinker at least once a day?

On top of that, there's the infrastructure investment that would be necessary. Watching every American drive every day will take more data processing than current wireless networks can handle. Even if we all put our phones down and never used WiFi again, there still isn't enough bandwidth to handle every car during rush hour in every major city, and you can forget about rural areas that have poor data connections.

That leaves us with an almost inevitable scandal. Surveillance supervisors will try to prioritize vehicles that are more likely to break driving rules. It would lead to a scandal where some whistleblower would claim that only people in fast cars or only people under 25 years old would be busted. We, as Americans, would be faced with a decision. Do we accept age discrimination the same way that we do with auto insurance or discrimination based on our freedom to choose a fast car, or do we challenge surveillance of American citizens?

I'll leave that to you.

In summary, if there is nationwide surveillance anytime soon, it'll be mediocre at best and it won't be effective. If it ever happens, though, I still expect Americans not to tolerate it.

[Spartan01]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Let's say every car got surveillance. Someone would have to observe all those cars, so a whole lot of people would suddenly have low-paying jobs where all they do is see if someone is speeding or driving against the rules. These people would have the most monotonous, boring jobs out there, and they'd barely be paying their bills. Do you think these guys would produce quality work? Do you think they'd be awesome at stopping people from breaking road rules, or do you think they'd be overwhelmed that almost every driver drives above the speed limit, rolls a stop sign, or fails to use their blinker at least once a day?

On top of that, there's the infrastructure investment that would be necessary. Watching every American drive every day will take more data processing than current wireless networks can handle. Even if we all put our phones down and never used WiFi again, there still isn't enough bandwidth to handle every car during rush hour in every major city, and you can forget about rural areas that have poor data connections.

That leaves us with an almost inevitable scandal. Surveillance supervisors will try to prioritize vehicles that are more likely to break driving rules. It would lead to a scandal where some whistleblower would claim that only people in fast cars or only people under 25 years old would be busted. We, as Americans, would be faced with a decision. Do we accept age discrimination the same way that we do with auto insurance or discrimination based on our freedom to choose a fast car, or do we challenge surveillance of American citizens?

I'll leave that to you.

In summary, if there is nationwide surveillance anytime soon, it'll be mediocre at best and it won't be effective. If it ever happens, though, I still expect Americans not to tolerate it.

Enhance you calm John Spartan

[John E]

Originally Posted by Pi kappa alpha

He gets a break. No one would find that thread in the convertible section....

Apparently so. lol.

[trashmanssd]

Quote Edger Friendly:
You see, according to Cocteau's plan... I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think; I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy likes who likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder - "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-O all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener." You live up top, you live Cocteau's way: what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. Your other choice: come down here... and maybe starve to death

[maxx210]

You mean not tolerate it like the way we have tolerated the moron that got elected and pushed for "Obama Care"? hehe

[purkel]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

In summary, if there is nationwide surveillance anytime soon, it'll be mediocre at best and it won't be effective. If it ever happens, though, I still expect Americans not to tolerate it.

too bad most people are at home watching American Idol or some other crappy show, and couldn't care less.

[scott's45]

45th's log, week 12....this a-hole still hasn't started me, or moved me in the slightest. I can't see a thing due to this cover. Wonder when I'll see the outside again...

[wakespeak]

I don't mind the blackbox for crashes. If it is my fault, I accept that. In fact if it helps prove the other guy was at fault, great.

However I don't like the snooping on my location in realtime unless I permit it. AFAIK this is only done through an OnStar style service or mobile phone networks plumbed into a car WIFI. Those things can be disconnected. I think we should look more into the context of the quote from Ford to see if it was specific to the Ford Sync, etc.

[wakespeak]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Let's say every car got surveillance. Someone would have to observe all those cars, so a whole lot of people would suddenly have low-paying jobs where all they do is see if someone is speeding or driving against the rules. These people would have the most monotonous, boring jobs out there, and they'd barely be paying their bills. Do you think these guys would produce quality work? Do you think they'd be awesome at stopping people from breaking road rules, or do you think they'd be overwhelmed that almost every driver drives above the speed limit, rolls a stop sign, or fails to use their blinker at least once a day?

On top of that, there's the infrastructure investment that would be necessary. Watching every American drive every day will take more data processing than current wireless networks can handle. Even if we all put our phones down and never used WiFi again, there still isn't enough bandwidth to handle every car during rush hour in every major city, and you can forget about rural areas that have poor data connections.

That leaves us with an almost inevitable scandal. Surveillance supervisors will try to prioritize vehicles that are more likely to break driving rules. It would lead to a scandal where some whistleblower would claim that only people in fast cars or only people under 25 years old would be busted. We, as Americans, would be faced with a decision. Do we accept age discrimination the same way that we do with auto insurance or discrimination based on our freedom to choose a fast car, or do we challenge surveillance of American citizens?

I'll leave that to you.

In summary, if there is nationwide surveillance anytime soon, it'll be mediocre at best and it won't be effective. If it ever happens, though, I still expect Americans not to tolerate it.

Hate to burst your bubble but this can be done now with very little overhead. The scenario where your location, speed, and direction are sent every second is not too much overhead for mobile networks. Each data package is very small. We're talking about perhaps 64 bits (8 bytes) of data + 60 bytes of networking wrappers for a total of 124-ish bytes. Storing the data is not a problem either for the same reasons, though it could be limited to the last hour or 24 hours before rolling it over.