It wasn't a straw man argument. I said, it was close to what you were saying. You on the other hand are arguing against something that doesn't exist... "YET."

So, lets take this a few steps further to go with your "YET."

You are correct, OnStar gives speed and impact site. If you were speeding and were in an accident, you can get a ticket without OnStar. They don't have to know your exact speed. Too fast for conditions or wreckless driving come to mind. They can also guess speed by length of tread marks. I have yet to hear of someone getting a ticket for speeding because of OnStar... "YET." There is plenty of other information available to get the speed.

The info from Tivo about what you watch is in the agreement. My question to use is, why aren't you so upset about it. Tivo is gathering all of this data and it is an invasion of privacy... except that they only release anonymous data. Take this one step further. What if the TV could tell that you were watching pirated content from a computer or DVD? It hasn't happened "YET." But it could.

You missed the point about software. What if every OS available is required to have said code installed because a law is passed? It hasn't happened "YET."

You actually probably missed a great deal about the Patriot Act and think that some LEO can just go do wiretaps on anyone. You really should read more about it from unbiased sources. It isn't as simple as you think. They can't just wiretap anyone. You should also read on how many portions of the Patriot Act have been overturned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

I don't support the Patriot Act in its entirety. I think some of it does make sense as an adaption to technology.

So really take off the tin foil hat about something that doesn't exist. From what I have seen, no one is trying to make this exist in the form you describe.

 

I will avoid onstar. As for disabling it, my worry is, it will become standard down the road.

As with airbags / black boxes, it starts off optional and so many people are so happy about the benefits. The black box just started as a debugging box in the event the airbag malfunctioned or whatever so they knew why / how it went off. Then the government realized that data could be useful so they mandated how it is stored and retrieved. And in the meantime they made airbags mandatory.

So like i said, i can foresee onstar or some analogous service becoming mandatory / standard in the future. OBDIII rumors have existed since the early 90s before OBDII was even out, and at the time it was like science fiction (your car will relay emmisions codes to compliance stations, your car will relay your speed, remote shut off capability) So, here we are with ALL of those capabilities for sale in hardware so reasonably priced that it is installed on EVERY car GM makes.

Even crazier, people are HAPPY about those capabilities.
- Relay emmisions codes to the dealers. Awesome, now i don't have to take a trip to find out my gas cap is loose. Even more awesome, there is now a paper record that your mom has been driving for 2 years with a P0420 and deserves a $500 fine for operating a vehicle with broken emmisions control devices.
- Relay speed to accident responders. Awesome, now in the event i am incapacitated they know i ran straight into that telephone pole at 60mph. Even more awesome, i'm driving down teh highway at 75mph in a 55 keeping up with traffic when some jerk cuts into my lane, and when i swerve to avoid him i spin out and go off the road. The first reponders write on the report that onstar reported my speed as 75mph. My claim is denied.
- Remote shut off. Awesome, if my car gets stolen maybe i'll get lucky and the cops will find it before it is trashed. Even more awesome, your mom's car threw a code P0420 last week and still hasnt taken it for service so the government tells the computer to disable the starter until it is towed in for service.

If you think all of that is ridiculous, i'm pretty sure someone would have said the same thing about airbags, black boxes, ABS, red light cameras, speed cameras, remote emmisions compliance testing, etc, etc.

Onstar is cheaper than an airbag. Cheaper than ABS and stability control. Cheaper than a downstream oxygen sensor necessary only for emmisions compliance checking. So please, explain to me exactly why / how the government won't decide to make onstar-type stuff mandatory when they have already added all those costs to your car?

As for red light cameras, speed camera, remote emmisions stations (those laser things some states are using on on-ramps to read tailpipes) are all VERY expensive. If an onstar type service becomes mandatory, it can replace all of those expensive pieces of equipment AND provides more coverage than ever. There is the government's big motive for this inevitable law.

 

Do you know what a straw man is? It's when you twist the argument to set up an obviously ridiculous scenario so you can easily tear it down.. In this case, you stated that people thought they were *always* being tracked. The post you quoted never used such terms, and even specifically said they don't need to always track you.

In some situations yes. See my previous post though. If you;'re going 75mph keeping up with traffic and someone runs you off the road, odds are you aren't getting a ticket unless some witness says you did something wrong. Which is my point, even judgement call subjective stuff (too fast for conditions can be argued by a good lawyer for example) is boiled down to a computer logged number. Your lawyer can;'t argue that onstar is lying.

Interesting new twist. Who is worried about invasion of privacy by itself? I'm worried more about invasion of privacy as it relates to self incrimination. Nothing on TV will get me in trouble with anyone.

So you don;'t know much about technology do you? Did you know there is a layer in HDMI specifically for copyright protection? HDCP, look it up. (hell, do you even know what layer means in this contect?)

OK, how exactly is this software going to tell the difference between an MP3 i ripped from a CD i own, an MP3 i bought on amazon, a theoretical MP3 i bought on allofmp3, or a hypothetical MP3 i DL'd from the web? Exactly. Unlike HDMI, my current listening format of choice does not have copyright protection because i specifically NEVER bought any MP3s with it. In some years when MO3s are gone and some new great format with copyright protection is the standard i'll worry, but there will always be kids out there to hack the protection (http://www.wired.com/science/discove.../1999/11/32263)

A regular old leo, sure, not getting into my phones easy. Agencies on the otherhand could do it pretty easy i'm sure. I don't need to read aboutit, i'm sure there is plenty of classified detail behind it. Or do you think the government tells their enemies exactly how to circumvent all detection?

ALL of the technology i am worried about exists. Only a matter of time until it is mandatory. Like i said in my last post, this technology is cheaper than airbags, ABS, stability control and even a simple heated O2 sensor. All of which are mandatory.

I'm sorry i can connect the dots. Maybe if you could come up with one reason why the government wouldn't make this mandatory then maybe this will keep going.

 

And I said, you were close to saying that. Again, plz read.


I wasn't aware that Onstar data is used in a court of law. People get out of other speeding tickets when radar guns are used. Also, you aren't likely to get a ticket for going 75mph when you are in an accident and not at fault. I don't think getting data from Onstar stating that would be any different. Again, they could use the ECM and get data. The data is out there if they really wanted it, and it is there today.


Yes, I do, but who said anything about HDMI? My TV plugs into my network and I can share files and it will play them. No HDMI involved. Samsung LCD. LN52A750. Works great. I play many shows that I download via bit torrent when my DVR doesn't work right. So, what if my was going to rat me out for it. What if your HDMI connection didn't work, and the TV logs the attempt. Is that any better? You aren't applying the same capabilities to different technologies and seeing the big picture. I am not saying any of this will ever happen, but you are saying this is likely to happen with Onstar. I am making a comparison here.

Very interesting that an HDMI cable is sufficient for pirated movies to you, but nothing is every going to stop MP3's. This argument wasn't about how it would be done. Just that there is a possibility of it. The link you posted was about cracking DVD's. I am not talking about software to prevent the hacking, but software that reports that the cracking has been done. Or that content that is on the device shouldn't be there. It is far fetched, but so is your idea about Onstar. Just making a comparison.

Straw man you were saying? I just know. I don't need to read about it. I am right because there is classified detail behind it.

I am not sure where you are going with the gov't telling their enemies how to circumvent all detection. I am not sure how that applies to the Patriot Act at all.


This technology isn't cheap. I don't know where you get that idea from. And you aren't connecting the dots. You are skipping several road blocks.

The gov't forcing people to pay for a monthly service has never been done before. Even if taxes are raised to pay for this, it doesn't mean that they would be able to use the data.

Try reading the 4th Amendment. It talks about illegal searches.

Understand the inefficiency of the gov't. CPS can't or won't provide details about illegal immigrants to INS.

Finally, the data already exists today in ECM's. Have you heard of cases where someone was in an accident and was given a ticket because their ECM said they were going too fast?

But all of this tin foil hat talk because you are big brother is going to give you a ticket for speeding if you are involved in an accident in a car equipped with onstar in which you have an active subscription. WOW!

 

I'm not wasting my time with most of your post. This sums it up pretty well. The government doesn't force anyone to pay for services? Here i thought i was paying for the roads i drive on with every drop of gas i buy. And i pay licensing fees for myself and my vehicles. Property taxes too. Garbage colection. Eductation for the children. Law enforcement. Fire department. Homeland defense. 4th of july fireworks.

Or more directly, take a look at your electric bill. Phone bill. Cable Bill. Water bill. Toll roads. Exactly, you want something, you pay the man for it. Driving a car is no different. If he wants $5 / month extra to fund keeping your highways safe, you'll pay it or walk. Or maybe the tickets alone pay for it. Plus the savings in setting up speed traps.

I'm not sure where you live, but i paid more than enough in government services to buy a new camaro just last year. And i was forced, i'd give up a lot to save just 10% of my taxes.

Mandatory onstar will more then pay for itself in revenue from tickets. As for taxes, it will be included with your registration. I've had to pay > $50 for emmisions checks on the old style dyno sniffers. That more than covers a ticket subsidized yearly basic onstar deal. The government isn't including directions and all the nice stuff after all.

 

All of this for fear of a possible way to get a speeding ticket in the future if new laws and requirements are passed. Big brother is after you. And they are going to get you with some many speeding tickets you are going to be in a FEMA camp... still wearing your tin foil hat.

I wasn't aware, that the electric company, phone company, and cable companies are gov't agencies. Most water districts are gov't run as well as sewer and trash. You are correct about that.

You don't pay monthly for a subscription to Law Enforcement or for the Fire Dept. Those come from property taxes and sales taxes in most places.

But you did leave out very good arguments against why this won't happen.

Try reading the 4th Amendment. It talks about illegal searches.

Understand the inefficiency of the gov't. CPS can't or won't provide details about illegal immigrants to INS.

The data already exists today in ECM's. Have you heard of cases where someone was in an accident and was given a ticket because their ECM said they were going too fast?

Also, laws differ by state. In some states, red light cameras are going down because they don't meet state law requirements.

Finally, you are giving Onstar new features that it doesn't have right now. It has no way of knowing the speed limit on the road you are driving. In cities with tall buildings, GPS signals are terribly inaccurate. It can't tell you which road you are on. You are saying that they are going to use Onstar instead of speed traps? How is that going to work? Onstar is going to contact the local police dept to tell them someone was speeding on a road in there area?

Speed limits change on roads too during construction times and school zones. Is Onstar going to have all of that data that changes as well?

 

And don't forget licesnsing fees and registrations. You pay the government for everything. If you want electricity, you have to pay the government for the right to get electricty. Same for all the other services provided by non-government agencies i mentioned, and not just sales tax, observe some highlights: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/understanding.html

-The Universal Service Fund (USF) provides support to promote access to telecommunications services at reasonable rates for those living in rural and high-cost areas, income-eligible consumers, rural health care facilities, and schools and libraries
-911 - Charge imposed by local governments to help pay for emergency services such as fire and rescue. "

If you want to use a phone, ANY phone, you pay to subsidize other people's phones. You pay for 911 service regardless of whether you ever use it or want it.

IOW, i completely blew your "The gov't forcing people to pay for a monthly service has never been done before." out of the water since i proved that the government charges you for pretty much every service you use. Inlcuding the privilege to operate a vehicle and register a vehicle.

I ignored this because it shows how naive you are.
-Try remembering that driving is a PRIVILEGE not a right. You forfeit many rights when you operate a vehicle on a public highway, most famously the right to refuse a breath/blood test.
- Further, since when is emmisions monitoring unreasonable? I have to let the state interogate my car's ECM (checking emmisions control status) in order to register it.

When you're on a public road, you have to display your license plate(s) in plain view, thereby publically identifying yourself to everybody. No privacy. You have no right to conceal your speed, nor do you have the right to operate an unregistered vehicle. You also can be searched in your immediate area of the passenger compartment without consent.


Are you kidding? Yes, i have heard of cases where black box data was used AGAINST the driver of the vehicle.

But a remote onstar system solves many of the limits. Also, RL cameras are expensive to buy and then maintain. Onstar completely solves that problem, servers and phone lines are cheap.

you got me, onstar doesn't have that. Other nav systems do though, they use it in their algorithms for optimizing travel time. Further, really nice nav systems even get updates on construction sites and even traffic conditions. Wouldn't take much to make it even know road conditions (wet / snow / ice)

Here you go with another straw man. So if the system doesn't work well in the big city so it's useless?

Even if they never go so far as to implement speed checking, the emmisions monitoring is a snap, IT'S ALREADY BUILT IN AND OPERATIONAL TODAY.

And since i established that commercially available nav systems know about contruction zones and traffic conditions i think i already answered your question.