RAD

Wow, we've struck a nerve here!

attsystems, I'll address you first with your insurance phone call example. First, there are ways to reasonably ensure that only the appropriate people can get this kind of data. Think about credit cards on the Internet; while there were many concerns about this initially--and in fact, there still are--the data is encrypted sufficiently so that the masses can use them without fear. Billions of dollars are spent over the Internet each year. And it is individuals, not corporations, who are doing the hacking, so I don't envision the "Insurance Big Brother" having access to this sort of data. But let's assume that he did. If you (or anyone else) is the type of driver that goes 155mph on the highway here in the states, then they most definitely do represent a much higher risk and probably deserve what they get.

attsystems, going to another of your posts in this thread, you say "Just think, insurance companies would use this to know how fast you drive, how many miles, etc..." Exactly! In any market--including insurance--more efficient pricing is derived from more information. Someone who drives a whole bunch of miles at a high rate of speed is, ceteris paribus, more of a risk than someone who doesn't. It's that simple. If you, or anyone else, is in the former category, I'd much rather have you weeded out with higher rates so that I and others can enjoy lower rates due to our less risk.

I believe I'm in E55AMG99's camp generally speaking: what have you (everyone, anyone) got to hide? I really don't understand the people who ***** and moan about invasions of privacy....unless you believe that someone will find something, in which case you probably need a wake-up call to begin with.

Barry45RPM, obviously there are "degrees" of breaking the law--which is why there are varying punishments for degrees of breaking the same law. Someone who is going 1mph over the limit is probably not going to be looked at twice; someone going 5mph may get a warning; someone going 10-20 mph over the limit may in fact be penalized.

MB--or anyone else--bring me easy-to-use vehicle tracking software!

ATS

The person who has nothing to hide is the person that hates their 135mph limit..

I really don't care to discuss this with people who do not see the broad implications of this.

Even companies such as Mercedes know how Big Brother this is. This is why they do not release the info.

If you want to live in a place like that good luck to you..

RAD

attsystems,

First, it is rather naive (I am trying to be kind) to suggest that I or anyone else do not see "the broader implications" simply because he doesn't agree with your final synopsis. Of course I see "the broader implications," which is why I stated that there are privacy issues early on in the thread. With any disruptive technology, there are always concerns for misuse. I share those concerns; I do not, however, become a neo-Luddite and attack the new technology over fear of misuse.

Second, I can assure you that DCX's lack of a location-based web app has nothing whatsover to do with any "Big Brother" notion, nor any altruistic feelings they have toward privacy invasion concerns. Like any other corporation, it is a financial decision, pure and simple.

Finally, to address your final comment, I forgot to mention: you and I both live in "that place" right now. And we will live in "that place" even more in the not-too distant future. So we might as well embrace it!

(edited to add last paragraph)

E55AMG99

Many vehicle manufactures today are beginning to share vehicle data in an effort to improve vehicle safety. Post crash/failure analysis is easier and more accurate if manufacturers had on board real time data loggers to give precise information leading up to the event.

I for one think this is a good thing for other reasons as well.
1) It is allowing manufacturers to gain more knowledge about how their products are used. In turn, they can build a better product that performs better and lasts longer.
2) Reduced car theft (lojack is already a limited help), carjackings, etc. could result in lower crime and lowered insurance rates.
3) Allowing insurance carriers apply a sliding scale rate to drivers who drive closer to the legal limit.

The implications ARE huge but being closed minded about it will only cause a poor implimentation of what might very well be inevitable. Personally, I don't really like people watching me. However, if I break a rule/law, I am willing to fully accept the consequences.

Barry45RPM

For a law enforcement agency to fine someone by looking through computer records after the fact, they must also have proof that they know who to fine in the first place. Just like with photo tickets, they need to prove you were behind the wheel when the law was broken.

My car was photographed in Washington DC by a speed control car & clocked @ 65 MPH in a 55 zone. I as the owner was issued a ticket weeks later by mail. I was never in DC, my son had borrowed the car. No proof who was driving, just the photo that my car was there doing 65. Ticket issued to me as the owner. No points on my license. No debate. Just a $ 100 fine.

The argument above is not valid.

NO ONE goes 15MPH in a school Zone. Hell, I bet you exit a 65 MPH freeway at 35MPH because the little yellow sign on the exit ramp is posted there? Are you doing the speed limit in the far left lane of a freeway "within the limits of the accuracy of todays speedometers"? ...or is that the speed limit observed by new drivers & old ladies in the far right lane. If you drove like that you would NEVER pass a single car on a roadway. Don't you occaisionally pass a car or two?

There is NO interpretation of the tax laws. Accountants see how far they can bend the definitions of what THEY consider lawfull deductions. If your taxes were pulled for the last 10 years, you would have interest & penalties assesed for every year on disallowed deductions. We all would. Thats why there should not be Big Brother recording all of our actions for review for no good lawfull reason.

The implications ARE huge but being closed minded about it will only cause a poor implimentation of what might very well be inevitable. Personally, I don't really like people watching me. However, if I break a rule/law, I am willing to fully accept the consequences.

I notice you live in California. Most people in your state think the Patriot Act is a criminal abridgement of the constitution... and you want to be watched all the time? I think not. The implications are horrific.

However, if I break a rule/law, I am willing to fully accept the consequences ...Yeah, on the ocaisions that you might get caught. NOT every thime you do it.

ATS

I mentioned this thread to a lawyer friend of mine this evening and he said that monitoring someone ALL OF THE TIME is the exact same thing as putting a traceable bracelet on everyone. I personally do not want to be treated like a criminal and watched all the time, but hey, if you want to do that to your family, children, yourself, go ahead.

I find it horrific that you think it is okay for law enforcement or gov't to do this. I dislike this idea; not because I am commiting a crime, but because I did not commit a crime.

vraa

If they do this as an opt-in sort of thing where you can switch it on and off I'd love it.

MRTG graphs of my fuel economy!

Spartan

I don't know if I should be amused or horrified with people who want to have tracking information available to authorities.

What the hell has happened to civilization? Doesn't anyone stand for freedom and liberty anymore? Doesn't anyone stand for individual right anymore? Why is it so hard to fathom that the minute you give an inch of your freedom to government, you will lose a mile of it? Why is it so hard to fathom that people who advocate authoritarian rule and giving goverments intruments of social regimentation over individual freedoms are advocating the muddy slide into a fascist state?

Some of you may want to be watched over but I for one will never be jack booted by any goverment.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

Does anyone here know who said this?

E55AMG99

E55AMG99

I understand your fear but I think it is highly improbable/impractical to monitor everyone all the time. Even a small subset of the population would be difficult.

IMO, I am willing to give up some freedom to remain free.

ATS

That was from your first President George Washington.. Who IMO was a great man. They wanted to make him King and he could have ruled until he was dead but he knew there could and would be a better system. Smart man.. Too bad he didn't know about hanging chads..

Baby Jocko

YES! Absolutely! That's common human behavior. Like, you've never lied before? Like, you've never driven 60 in a 55? This is what I don't like about the illusion of "freedom" in the US. Laws in the US are not just created for the protection of life and property, they are also created for revenue and automaton control.

Consider a red traffic light at 4 AM with no other car in sight. The "law" expects you to wait until the light turns green. Most US citizens have been trained to do just that. They know that if they prematurely proceed, a cop could come from nowhere and issue a ticket. The people have become civic automatons.

OTOH, take southern Italy for example: Laws are generally accepted as guidelines. No harm, no foul. As long as personal body or property is not harmed, it doesn't matter if you go through the red light at any time of day. Most Americans consider such a concept as being chaotic. But that is because Americans have not been granted the freedom to do whatever they want. They are controlled automatons. In this example, Italians have total freedom. It is the consequence of their error that makes order out of the apparent chaos.

So, it's really not a matter of getting caught or not, it should be a matter of having REAL freedom with laws only serving as consequential rules. Otherwise, it is not “freedom,” it is control (with a strong dose of delusion to help you think its freedom).

Baby Jocko

That is precisely what they are doing, which I think they even realize and prefer. Fascism is the result of extreme nationalism. Nationalism is the result of mass psychological manipulation. The alternative: USE YOUR OWN HEAD AND THINK FOR YOURSELF!

RAD

We have had some major thread drift here. FWIW, I would like to restate the original point. I was (and still am) interested in a web app so that I (or my relatives when I and my family are on a trip) can track my E500. Clearly the hardware is already there, or the Tele-Aid would not work. For all this talk of free-spiritedness and individualism, I thought this idea would garner some appreciation by taking it solely out of the hands of "The Man" (MB, or whomever they sub out to run TeleAid) and into the hands of individuals.

Barry45RMP, atssystems.com, and Spartan, not once did I suggest "giving this away" to the authorities so that someone could be monitored all the time. Nor do I think that having this technology out there is "giving the devil a foothold," so to speak, a precursor to Big Brother actually happening. The technology IS already out there. My idea was for those who wanted it to be able to take it from "The Man" (TeleAid in this case) and use it on their own. Isn't that individualistic? Doesn't that stand for freedom?

atssytems.com, I don't know if the "you" you refer to is me or E55AMG99 (or neither), but FWIW, not once did I say (or even suggest) that I or my family should be monitored 100% of the time. I don't think E55AMG99 did either. I for one (unfortunately) do not spend 100% of my time in my E500. We are talking about INDIVIDUALS having the ability to monitor the whereabouts of their own private vehicle--not the government monitoring individuals 100% of the time.

Spartan, while I admire your political diatribe (three cheers for the first ammendment!), again, I don't think anyone was discussing "having tracking information available to the authorities." However, this information does already exist, albeit in another form. I'm not sure where you live, but here in the Northeast (and in many other parts of the country), we have wireless toll-paying devices that allow you to go through the toll both and pay wirelessly. Since this information is time-stamped when you pass through (what digital information isn't), "Big Government" can see how fast it took you to get from one toll booth to another, thereby knowing if you are speeding or not. Now this IS an example where the government is already monitoring you--it is NOT the example purported in this thread, which is for private individuals to be able to monitor their own vehicles or assets--but I know few people who would sacrifice the convenience of these wireless toll-paying devices because of a "Big Brother" phobia.

Baby Jocko, I laughed out loud at your "civic automaton" comment. But I cried at its logic! In your traffic light example, you correctly imply that a driver stops at a red light at 4:00am with no cars in sight out of the "fear" or possibility that a cop might be hiding around the corner and will give him a ticket if he doesn't stop. This, in a nutshell, is the foundation of law itself: society needs at least basic laws or else falls into anarchy. I found your supporting example of Southern Italy especially funny. I've driven all over the world, and one place I do not drive (trains/cabs only on the ground) is Southern Italy, for exactly the reason you mention! The drivers pay little attention to road regulations. If this for you is freedom, I don't want any part of it. Anarchy is also freedom.

Well, enough for now. A very interesting thread! Again, to get us back on topic: no one here has suggested giving away their location 100% of the time to The Man. We're only talking about private individuals having the capacity to track their own vehicles in real time, if they so choose.

Baby Jocko

My example of southern Italy exemplifies a society that has quintessential freedom. In anarchy, laws have no consequences. In my example, (I thought) I clearly stated the difference between the essence of laws in the US vs. that of southern Italy: US laws not only serve as protection for body and property but also for revenue and control whereas the laws in southern Italy serve as consequential rules in case life or property were to be harmed. That cannot be anarchy. There ARE consequences in southern Italy to whoever harms life or property. It’s just that it follows the basic principle: No harm, no foul; which IMO is quintessential freedom -- being able to make your own decisions and do whatever you want to do while taking full responsibility for your actions by accepting severe consequences if your action harms life or property. It's not for everyone. Many people prefer to be controlled and live within a controlled society.

Spartan

The "your" president does not apply. I can “loosely” be called Canadian but prefer to think of myself as a free world citizen.

Nevertheless…….words of great man should never be forgotten.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RAD,

Diatribe? Well.......I dodged bullets and was prepared to die in the streets of Athens in 1974 to free my people from the dictators tyranny. 30 years later, we have people who advocate convenience without regard to the inevitable consequences.

Alright, lets start this over.......

Your example of a portable toll transponders in not the same as having a built in tracking system for a car. It’s an instrument of convenience that you can opt not to have by simply placing it on a counter. Tracking is common fare in the trucking industry.

On the other hand……

There already voices in our North American societies that are screaming for technology to control our driving behavior. Great Britain is already far into the path of government observation” for their “own good”. Do you have any idea how many cameras and speed traps Great Britain has?

Your argument is that you want to have that option for your own convenience. Let me tell you now that it will never be left that way. In all the cars that we drive, there is a black box that records many parameters just before an accident. It is standard fare in all cars and yet no one has rallied on the streets to remove it. Now, they “benign and benevolent” authorities are using it to prosecute drivers. Insurance companies are using it so as not to pay claims.

Governments and special interests are becoming ever more sophisticated in manipulating public opinion. They will use every instrument that technology affords them to reach a self serving goal. For governments it usually revolves around taxes and public regimentation. It is ALWAYS sold as something that is good for you ( and of course, you must be a budding “terrorist” to think otherwise). You are ALWAYS told that it will never be used for anything but your best interests. And yet……it always intended to control you. Remember, you are giving that decision power and control to politicians who’s very essence in their soul is …..power.

You may want to track your wife, daughter or whatever but are you prepared for the inevitable offshoot of that technology? Is your freedom worth less then the 25 cent phone call that those loved one can make to you?

Be careful what you wish for my friend, the same technology that can helps advance our civilization can also be the facilitator of our enslavement.

~~~~~~~~~~

Here are some articles that a simple internet search found. Read the following and start fearing for your freedoms.

http://www.caltax.org/member/digest/...1/apr01-07.htm

http://home.earthlink.net/~rdmadden/...r_Freedom.html

http://www.accountabilityutah.org/Is.../Tax080304.htm

FIXEDupW209

i didn't feel like reading through all of this so if i am repeating it then sorry.

i believe cobra alarm systems have a system put in where you can track your car's location from the internet.

RAD

Spartan,

Thank you for taking the time for an intelligent, informed response. I respect your opinion--in fact, I certainly agree with your statement "the same technology that can help advance our civilization can also be the facilitator of our enslavement." But that alone does not, IMHO, mean that we must avoid technological progress completely, and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Further, I do not think that you should, based on my "convenience" comment on wireless toll-paying devices, lump me into a general category of "people who advocate convenience without regard to the inevitable consequences." That is much too broad a statement.

Let's find some common ground: the Internet. We are all using it to communicate and share info about our Mercedes-Benz vehicles (or our desire for them). In this case, we've waxed political, which is OK for a brief tangent, I suppose. No doubt we'd all agree that the Internet is a wonderful thing, full of conveniences that make business and personal life easier. There is also a dark underbelly of the Internet, but are we going to shoot ourselves in the collective foot and eschew its greatness to call attention to its problems? The Internet too, my friend, can be used to track you. "Spyware" is rampant. Cookies are used to track surfing habits. No doubt you've heard of the FBI's Carnivore program. The list goes on. I'm not saying that I agree with the potential lack of privacy there. But do we "cry foul" about the whole Internet as a result, or do we instead try to exploit its more positive attributes? Similarly, I'm not particularly keen on the government tracking every move I make. (I for one do not think that will ever be a real possibility--there would have to be too many people hired to monitor the monitoring!). But that doesn't mean that I don't want tracking available for personal use.

I appreciate the links; very interesting, but flawed from a logic perspective. The first, about California possibly using GPS to track users for a tax-by-miles-driven is predicated, according to the article, on alternative-fuel transportation becoming mainstream in the near future, which I believe is quite a stretch. ""The gas tax is good for another seven or 10 years, but as we move to a system where we don't use gasoline or diesel fuel, we have to find some alternative ways of charging the users," said Professor Martin Wachs..." I'm comfortable in going on the record that in 7 to 10 years (even 20-30) Californians will still be using gasoline or diesel fuel for the vast majority of its transportation, effectively negating that concern.

The second link does well in pontificating on numerous doomsday scenarios, not unlike a fire-and-brimstone sermon. The crux of Madden's point is this: "Fearing the intertwining of these technological developments may smack of paranoia to some. It is safe to say, however, that these inventions and applications are mere foreshadowing of future avenues for control of citizens." Why focus on the negative? Every technological advancement has its downside. Cars kill thousands every year. Should we get rid of those?

The third link, not unlike the first, introduces a GPS-chip tracking scenario in autos in order to levy a mileage tax in Utah. Technologically possible, yes. If you don't like it (and you're a resident of Utah), call or write your congressman and let him know it! If he disagrees, vote him out of office!

Spartan

Of all things...in a few minutes I am heading out to watch the Manchurian Candidate........

In the links I provided, the focus should be on the growing "acceptability" of tracking cars (and their owners) for some perceived "good". I could not care less for what purpose one uses to justify tracking, I care that the wolves are ready to control the sheepnesses of the silent majority.

The minute that Mercedes does it on their own is the same minute that I will take out full page adds in major papers proclaiming "German Car Company Aids in Creating a Fascist State". The same measure of success that affords me to buy their product will also be used to nail them to the freedom cross.

Anyhow.....

I believe we have reached an impass in our views. I will never accept any type tracking as a means for a greater "good" or as an instrument of convinience.

MKW

There are insurance companies now offering significant policy premium DISCOUNTS if you agree to install a black box that monitors maximum speed , total time at a given speed, etc , despite the usual speed lobby statistics that show driver incompetance and carelessness are just as important in causing accidents. I'm sure little old ladies in tennis shoes driving Priuses are signing up left and right. Next step will probably be policy HIKES if you DON"T install the box.
I'd like to see discounts for detectors installed that sniff for coffee fumes , detect cell phone activity , or sense weaving in traffic . That's where they would get the most accidents avoided , esp in urban areas, LOL.
The feds want , and many cars already have , black boxes that continuosly record the last 30 seconds of speed, steering angle, G-forces, etc so that in a crash they can supposedly develop better active and passive safety systems in the future. ( And so the manufacturers and insurers can more easily defend themselves , the police can more easily reconstruct events , the trial lawyers can pay for their Ferraris, etc. )

Mr. Xristo

It would be no surprise. I called AllState to find out if their rates were less than State Farm.

The lady wanted my Social Security Number. She informed me that AllState now requires peoples' Social Security Number as they run credit checks against new applicants.

AllState offers more competitive insurance rates to people with a higher credit scores. Conversely, AllState offers higher insurance rates to people with a lower credit scores.

I was told their *statistics* have shown that people with lower credit are more likely to be involved in an accident.

In my opinion, another *shady way* for the insurance companies to discriminate against people and charge higher rates.

Credit scores have nothing to do with the way you drive. Interestingly enough, AllState does not provide the data used in their statistical calculations; I wonder why: with statistics, you can skew any result in any favor depending on the sample data utilized.

Barry45RPM

Credit scores DO have a "relative relationship" with many other activities. The care with which you stick to payment schedules translates to "care" as in "carefull", attention to rules etc. It doesn't matter whether your monthly bill is $ 100. or $1,000., or whether you make a partial payment or pay in full every month... just how well you follow the rules and make your payments on time. It is only a statistical relationship, but only one of many criteria that goes into evaluating a "complete person" for many things including dependability, rule following, wildness, etc. Its all in figuring out the probabilities.