It connects to government databases to get the legal speed limit on a given road. To do this, it needs to provide:
A Unique identifier
The current location to a high degree of precision
The former is tracking. The latter lets said agency know exactly how fast you are moving at.
So it becomes a question: Do you trust the government to not use that data against you? Especially considering that speeding tickets would drop drastically (proving that you went 75 in a 70 with just a lidar gun is rather tenuous) and this would provide an automated mechanism, similar to red light cameras.
I personally think the concept of this is a good idea. But there is no way to implement it that does not drastically invade privacy and set us up for some pretty trivial bullshit. Because, fun story time:
Growing up, there was one major road that went through a good part of the state. Your bog standard highway so you go from 50-70 down to 20-30 the moment you enter a “town”. And one stretch was notorious. Because cops would actively tailgate drivers and refuse to slow down. So you would see “reduce speed ahead” and know your choice was to keep speeding or get accused of “brake checking” a cop. And the moment you passed the 35 MPH sign, they would flip on their lights and pull you over with a pretty massive ticket.
Now imagine that except the construction zone was not properly removed from the database or the sign was obscured by a tree. And you get the ticket in the mail a week later so can’t even easily verify what happened.
The bill only sets outs the requirement and doesn’t specify what technology will be used to achieve that requirement. But @[email protected] is right, the only way it can actually work is if you have a database to compare to and a precise location. Without precise location, you might as well be comparing the speed limit of the other side of the city instead of the street the car is.
As used in this article, “intelligent speed limiter system” means an integrated vehicle system that uses, at minimum, the GPS location of the vehicle compared with a database of posted speed limits, to determine the speed limit, and electronically limits the speed of the vehicle to prevent the driver from exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 miles per hour.
Well looks like they pointed out the exact mechanism the bill proposes.
They say it’s passive, but how do you keep the database synched? Actively. And since your car is already connecting to the government computers to actively get the database it’s not a stretch to assume a next step is monitoring car movements en masse.
And what happens when the database isn’t updated in a timely way, or when a car loses GPS signal, or when you leave the state?
Then please, let me know what part of the bill refutes the above?
How are they serving the data without GPS? And how is GPS not going to require a unique identifier and the current location to a high degree of precision?
Again. The entirety of this hinges on whether you trust the us government to not increase scope in the future. Often through incredibly sketchy and broad manners, like the patriot act.
It connects to government databases to get the legal speed limit on a given road. To do this, it needs to provide:
The former is tracking. The latter lets said agency know exactly how fast you are moving at.
So it becomes a question: Do you trust the government to not use that data against you? Especially considering that speeding tickets would drop drastically (proving that you went 75 in a 70 with just a lidar gun is rather tenuous) and this would provide an automated mechanism, similar to red light cameras.
I personally think the concept of this is a good idea. But there is no way to implement it that does not drastically invade privacy and set us up for some pretty trivial bullshit. Because, fun story time:
Growing up, there was one major road that went through a good part of the state. Your bog standard highway so you go from 50-70 down to 20-30 the moment you enter a “town”. And one stretch was notorious. Because cops would actively tailgate drivers and refuse to slow down. So you would see “reduce speed ahead” and know your choice was to keep speeding or get accused of “brake checking” a cop. And the moment you passed the 35 MPH sign, they would flip on their lights and pull you over with a pretty massive ticket.
Now imagine that except the construction zone was not properly removed from the database or the sign was obscured by a tree. And you get the ticket in the mail a week later so can’t even easily verify what happened.
You didn’t read the bill, did you?
The bill only sets outs the requirement and doesn’t specify what technology will be used to achieve that requirement. But @[email protected] is right, the only way it can actually work is if you have a database to compare to and a precise location. Without precise location, you might as well be comparing the speed limit of the other side of the city instead of the street the car is.
Well looks like they pointed out the exact mechanism the bill proposes.
They say it’s passive, but how do you keep the database synched? Actively. And since your car is already connecting to the government computers to actively get the database it’s not a stretch to assume a next step is monitoring car movements en masse.
And what happens when the database isn’t updated in a timely way, or when a car loses GPS signal, or when you leave the state?
Then please, let me know what part of the bill refutes the above?
How are they serving the data without GPS? And how is GPS not going to require a unique identifier and the current location to a high degree of precision?
Again. The entirety of this hinges on whether you trust the us government to not increase scope in the future. Often through incredibly sketchy and broad manners, like the patriot act.