The DOT wants to know where you are

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

What could go wrong? The DOT has proposed that all new cars be required to broadcast their location and speed.

They claim that this data could be used to provide drivers with a warning if their vehicle might be getting too close to another vehicle. It will also be necessary to make driverless cars more reliable.

I wonder what other uses this information could have.


One comment

  • Edward

    “There is no data in the safety messages exchanged by vehicles or collected by the V2V system that could be used by law enforcement or private entities to personally identify a speeding or erratic driver,” the report said. “The system — operated by private entities — will not enable tracking through space and time of vehicles linked to specific owners or drivers.”

    I believe that almost as much as the fairness of the IRS as it grants statuses based upon political leanings, or the supposedly beneficent NSA collecting data on every American’s phone calls, or the supposedly protective DOJ making sure that Mexican drug cartels don’t buy guns from the US, take them across the border, and murder hundreds of people.

    Or that I can keep my healthcare plan if I like my healthcare plan. Period. End of story.

    So, no, I don’t trust some low-level employees’ opinion on what greedy, tax-hungry, lying governments will not do with information coming from any system.

    Other uses:
    1) The government could tax you for driving your car (where’s the freedom there?).
    2) Automatically ticket you if the 10-meter-accurate GPS decides that you are going 1 MPH too fast (where’s the freedom there?).
    3) Automatically ticket you if you park 1-minute too long in a parking space (where’s the freedom there?).
    4) Blackmail you because they figured out you are having an affair (where’s the freedom there?) or went golfing instead of to work (presidents keep getting flack for that, so why wouldn’t they want to put that burden on the rest of us, too?).
    5) Warn you that you are about to drive off a cliff (oh, wait, the government can’t even see it’s approaching its own fiscal cliff, so they don’t seem to care about driving off cliffs).
    6) Some overly curious government employee could track you specifically for whatever nefarious purpose (where’s the freedom there?), such as setting the paparazzi on celebrities he doesn’t like.

    And somehow I suspect that the project to warn us when we are too close will become just too difficult to implement (the FAA has been trying, unsuccessfully, to automate this same thing for airplanes since at least the 1970s). But the taxing, ticketing, blackmailing will remain.

    Even if the car does warn us about driving “too close” (whatever that means), doesn’t that just add to the distractions we already have to overcome while driving?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *