achapman

No VNV despite what it says this is NOT X-rated:

"Massachusetts hopes to establish a pilot program later this year that
would analyze data from the devices in GM cars involved in fatal
crashes and compare the results with conclusions reached by human
analysis, to help confirm the electronic recordings. But the state
trooper planning the program, David Noonan, said that he did not know
if he could ask a judge for a search warrant to obtain the boxes in a
criminal investigation.
That has not been Massachusetts' purpose, or GM's in obtaining or
analyzing the data. GM has been circumspect about the boxes because it
does not want them used in litigation; in fact, executives are
concerned that car buyers could shy away from such cars if they thought
the data could be used against them.
The company has been using the information mostly to refine its onboard
safety systems, and wants the information from the newer boxes to
show what a typical driver's behavior is in the seconds before a crash."

The total article is at the following address:

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/edr-sit..._Accidents.pdf

Granted our C1/C2's don't have a "Black Box", but I'm sure at some point in time you will be buying a new or newer car and it just might have one installed..... :smash: So Peanut Gallery, what's your thoughts on this..... is it :bs , hype, or what.... :D

Swamp Thang

you know where this is headed ...

Combine a BlackBox that records all vehicle data (ie speed) and GPS information, and you have traffic enforcement by satellite. You will get billed each month for all your violations, speeding, running red lights, illegal turns, etc. Big Brother Loves You.

barkingowl

Except for monitoring speed can't something like Onstar collect all that info already?

Chuck Harmon

Chuck :(

Blkblt

NO WAY would I want one in any vehicle of mine!!! Particularly with a GPS system.

I can see it now: "Honey; if you were just going to the post office, why are you on the other side of town right now???" :eek: :D :seeya

Bad idea. And, I concur that any data developed from "your" box could and would be used against you. :smash: :smash:

********************

********************
Jeff
Ô66. Modified L72
ÒThe Silver BeastÓ
Keep on :cheers: :seeya :seeya

pittsaj

You mean no more midnight blasts through the gears down the interstate to blow out the dust

What do you mean I was speeding :eek: :cry

This is a warning ,,, Right??? :D

Tony

MassVette

Looks like yet another scam to further enrich Big Insurance.
IMHO, Big Insurance owns the banks, therefore Big Insurance OWNS the government. They pols do what they're told, like good little boys, or else:
1. No more City, state or federal bond funding- they can at will put your town, city or state in the toilet financially.
AND
2. No more money for re-election campaigns! (The BIG Cahuna.....).

When the legislators submit bills for action, do people REALLY think most of the bills are written by the legislators themselves? NO. They're HANDED to them , ALL RESEARCHED, and ALL WRITTEN by the hordes of lawyers who work for the big $$$$ special interests. And they better pass them or else..........that pack of drunks up on Beacon Hill couldn't legislate their way out of a paper bag.
In my opinion, this unholy system is what really makes the world of politics go 'round.
:mad :mad :yesnod: :yesnod: :mad :mad
The little guy doesn't have a chance, or a clue in the arcane world of power and money. My 2c. Sorry for the rant......these guys really tick me off.

stngry63

I knew it. I'm putting the points back in the distributor and the tin foil is going back in my hat! :hat

Ih2lose

I have a cadillac 2002 esculade with onstar the end of this week is my one year aniverary for having the car and the free onstar service exspires THANK GOODNESS talk about a black box It can tell where you are how fast your going you name it they have the information and they can also do a dianostic on the car if you are pulled over .they can open doors and windows and blow the horn.If you have on star ask them what they can do and they will show you how much of your car they can control with you on the phone

I also have a 2002 C5 this car also has a black box in it that only records the last 15 secounds prior to a airbag deployment.But this black box because of the traction control acually give all the data.speed,rpm,gaspedal pressur,brake pedal pressure,the yaw control
(has some thing to do with the traction control to tell you how far out the car was hanging) Alot of this information was on the C5 board makes for good reading. Any ways this is someething that is out there and pretty scary.The way I see it is that it can only help me out of trouble because I dont do crazy things (if they could only make a car that knew if you were drunk or not) As you can figure I dont drink eather.
I own a fleet of service trucks and just about all the trucks have a GPS system in them that I also can watch the trucks ,see how fast they are going,how long they stop and where,I used to feel funny when driving one of the truck because you know the box is recording you But hey its the same thing in my C5 and esculade and I dont even know who going to be looking at that information.

I remember from last year one of the forum members is a engineer or a land surveyor and had posted a link or a photo from a satalite image from space I meen talk about BB being able to watch us this photo was clear as a bell does anybody remember who this was

Maximillian

Your C5 does have a "black box"....almost all American cars do. At the very least, it's recording RPM, speed and a/f ratio.

I have had a friend be denied warranty work on his Z06 ('01) because they determined that the code was thrown at 7,200 rpm due to an inadvertent down shift......can you say, "voided warranty"?




[Modified by Maximillian, 6:58 PM 10/22/2002]

SWCDuke

I don't understand what the trooper is taking about. There have been press articles about obtaining the black box data in the investigation of fatal accidents. The evidence has sent people to jail and judges in most states have no qualms about issuing search warrants. In the cases I read about the guy deserved to go to jail (drunk), but the idea of these things is repulsive. I think Tom Jefferson would have felt the same.

I think GM's response is BS. They know damed well that if the data is there, lawyers will get it.

As far as I'm concerned it's a real good reason NOT to buy a new Corvette.

Duke

Mac

I'm with you, stngry63, only this time, I'm putting on my lead-lined underwear as well. :hat

Relax, guys. Unless I've missed something completely, you are innocent until proven guilty or has G. W. Bush repealed that one as well??

GPS is monitored by a computer and computers have been proven prone to erroneous readings. The Supreme Court's current position on these kinds of technology is pretty simple. Technology can be used to confirm the expert opinion of an officer of law. Radar, laser, photo-radar, you name it. As stated above, technology, in and of itself, is considered to be unreliable. For officers to enter radar and laser speed measuring evidence, they must prove that the instrument was tested (before and after use) and operated within manufacturer's specs. Even then, the reads only serve to confirm the officer's observations and expert estimation of speed.

Years ago, I had a truck driver produce his original truck speed log (a mechanical device installed in his truck recorded engine RPMs and speedo reading) to prove he wasn't speeding when I stopped him. Since he was depending on this technology to introduce a reasonable doubt, he had to enter it as evidence which meant he exposed himself to crossexamination. Here in British Columbia, we cops act as prosecution for their own tickets. I asked him all the same questions that should be asked of any traffic cop using radar or laser speed measuring devices- Has your instrument been certified for speed measurement? Was the instument operating properly? How did you confirm this? Can you articulate what those tests are and how they prove this instrument was functioning properly? He didn't have the answers, so the ticket stood (which is good because it was a rightous ticket- I don't write bad ones).

As for 'black box' technology being used to void warranty protection, it would be up to the dealership to prove that the 'black box' was not producing erroneous readings and, since the reading occurred while the vehicle was in your custody, not theirs, that would be very difficult for them to do. By the same token, using 'black box' technology to investigate collisions would require the cooperation of the vehicle's owner. When you buy the car, you buy the 'black box' and no-one has the right to demand it's information contents without your permission or a search warrant.

As for GPS being used to prove you were speeding, remember- GPS only proves your sensor was moving. It doesn't say you were in the driver's seat or that your car wasn't on the back of a speeding flatdeck truck. Go ahead and prove otherwise.

magicv8

GM is not going to sell any high priced cars with onstar, gps, or any other recording functions if people vote with their feet and go elsewhere.

Chuck Harmon

Mac,

You bring a measure of reassurance in your post. Thank you! But here in California, photo radar is sufficient to ticket you as the registered driver of the car. The burden of the proof falls on the owner to establish innocence. In other words, if you don't want the ticket you must rat on whoever was in the drivers seat at the time, testifying against them.

Speeding tickets have also be sent to renters of Hertz for speeding in cars equipped with GPS. It may take a while, but I can see the voluntary compliance of turning over black boxes to the police in the same way that signing our tax return is voluntary, you can go to jail or be heavily fined if you don't. Same with Breathalyzer tests which are supposedly voluntary too.

This last example raises the dilemma for me. I don't mind a suspected drunk driver having to be tested for alcohol, but I do mind being tracked and fingered for other traffic laws. Like the other standards, the line is drawn at different points regarding what is OK and what is not by different yet reasonable people.

Chuck

pittsaj

Ih2lose,

And You're worried about Big Brother? :rolleyes:

I get it,
It Depends on who is watching who

Tony



[Modified by pittsaj, 8:33 PM 10/22/2002]

Mac

As odd as it may sound, having worked on a highway patrol for a couple years, I don't think speed enforcement is an effective way of reducing traffic collisions and improving traffic safety but, unfortunately, they haven't found a way to regulate common sense as yet, so the speeding tickets will continue until something better comes along.

Police have been enforcing speed limits for a lot of years and the collision rates, particularly the fatality rates, continue to decline. Some police look upon this as confirmation that they're doing a good job by using negative reinforcement (tickets) to encourage good driving habits. Ask anyone who knows anything about training and they'll tell you negative reinforcement doesn't work ever.

In my humble opinion, the improvements in collision rates and fatalities has much more to do with road design and technology improvement in automobile engineering than speed enforcement. Let's face it- everyone who is reading this message who has driven a car has sped. I feel absolutely confident making this 'carte blanche' statement. Have we all died in crashes? Apparently not yet.

Roadways are wider, centre medians prevent 'head-on' collisions, road shoulders are paved, all of these things help prevent collisions. Cars have airbags, seat belts, crumple zones and ABS brakes that make emergency stops a matter of stepping down hard, instead of having to modulate or threshold brake to prevent lock-up. The skill level required to operate a vehicle safely is being lower because the 'least common denominator' is driver skill.

If regulators truly wanted to create an impact on driving safety, they would require comprehensive driver's training and testing. If drivers were forced to show true competence behind the wheel rather than the 'cracker jack' testing most states and provinces require, a significant number of drivers would no longer hold licences and the roads would be safer as a result.

However, no politician worth his brass penny would ever vote for such regulations because the costs involved in comprehensive testing would be onerous and the costs to drivers to obtain the skills would be even more onerous, so drivers would never re-elect such a politician and trust me- every politician is motivated by what will keep him in office, not by the greater good.

Damn! Who put this soapbox under me?? :lol: :lol:

Blkblt

Mac.

Well stated indeed!! :cheers:

*******************
Jeff
'66, Modified L72
It never speeds.... :rolleyes: :D

Ih2lose

And You're worried about Big Brother? :rolleyes:
I get it,
It Depends on who is watching who
Tony
I am not so concerned about who is watching with the black box in the C5 it's the onstar I hated.It never gave me a tangable benifit I could never reach them when I needed them except for once we locked our keys in the car on a vacation last year and they unlocked the truck for us.

The GPS in my service trucks give me a fleet discount on insurance,helps my dispatcher better dispatch his service men,save's me on addtional milage I never knew my trucks were doing (Men taking the trucks shopping,ball games,To freinds house,s ECT ECT ECT) when they first went in the trucks I had alot of complaints about me not trusting them and how wrong it was,Slowley but shureley they forgot about them and I started to understand what trust was.Our agreement was they can take there trucks to and from work no personal truck use with out prior permistion.6 weeks into having them I realized what a mistake that was I trusted them not to use for personal use and all of them were driving all over as stated above.In one week 6 of the trucks (THE ONLY SIX I SAMPLED)registered over 900 miles for unauthorized personal use.This was milage put on after the trucks and registered at the fellows home 900 mile divided by 10 mpg=90 gallons x 1.45 per gallon $130.50 I had to spend extra on gas alone x52=$6,786.00 per year extra in gas remember this was only a small sampling of my fleet SO YES IT IS NECCESARY for me to watch.Anybody else with a fleet should do the same.

joe58

I'm sure it won't be long before someone markets a "black box eraser"

Crazyhorse

Better yet, I see a new line of business popping up.

Black box removal.

Hmmm, this could be a lucrative business, until they outlaw it :rolleyes: