Originally posted by: Homerboy
This isnt the greatest analogy in the world as my keystrokes really cant kill or harm other people now can it? (minus hacking into NORAD I guess).
The analogy isn't the best in the world simply because you could have a different level of expectations at home opposed to a vehicle. What the possible consequences are are a lot less significant. Why? Because although keystrokes may be less harmful in such a violent and immediate sense as a car crash is, there is still, as with vehicles, the ability for gross "misuse". For instant, pedofile's who chat with little pre-teen boys and girls and tries to meet with them. Although this is not as "visual" as a car crash, it can still have devastating effects. There would be several examples.
My keyboard strokes, are a personal item. How fast I am driving on a public street SHOULD BE publicly accessable information. Now if the black box is recording I stopped at the grocery store 10 times this week, and the porn store 100 times, thats a dif story.
They may be a personal item, however the Internet is a public forum/network just as our roads are public. What they carry are simply different A better example than a keylogging program would be an actual physical black box connected at your ISP that keeps a record of all data you pass through it. Should this be publically available information too? I don't think so personally. But there's an argument for it, it's being argued constantly in fact. I am curious about your stated limits in acceptance for a device like this... If it records speed, fine. If it records location, not fine. It's location, along with speed, part of this public access idea you support? If the streets are public, and that makes your actions accountable, and recordable on them, why would location be restricted while speed isn't? You can't really have your cake and eat it too (I don't even know what that means, but it seems to be appropriate?). If the argument is that WHERE you go is not anyone else's business and that speed/braking data is useful because it can be used to determined what happened in an accident, that's a bad bad reason. Imagine how many hit-and-run cases would be closed (all of them?) if we were able to record a vehicle's location! Just enter a time and place into a query and blam! You know that it was Mr. Green on State St. with the Land Rover
Of course, hopefully those things never mess up. It'd be horrible if you were driving somewhere and it just happened to wig out for a few minutes and hop you over a street. Who knows if that could happen. It might be possible? if you're vehicle isn't able to view a GPS sat, but there are some sort of reflective structure that gets your signal and blasts it up to space. The signal would appear to be coming from the building, moving as you do, even though you're not really "there". This might sound like a stretch, it could be, I don't know. But I'm not sure anyone else here does either? Even if that's impossible, it still doesn't change the fact that you can't justify speed recording and not other things like location, maybe some kind of sleepyness analysis (technology I've seen actually demo'd on TV). What would be better than to get a ticket because some wireless app notified the closest law enforcement officer you're dozing off? You better hope THAT technology is 100% reliable...
I assume that people against these black boxes in cars are also against them in commercial airliners? Or private planes? Would only make sense...
Commercial airlines? No, that shouldn't even be an issue. Someone that has a problem with that is plain crazy IMO. And this isn't some kind of terrorist threat reaction. As far as I'm concerned, Ridge can stuff those colors, well, it ain't pretty. It's simply that unlike an average vehicle, a airliner isn't tied specifically to you. If it goes to fast, oh well. If it gets to its' destination... umm, good. If it doesn't, the OWNER of the aircraft will probably want to know where it flew off to. Regardless, it wouldn't be able to record personally identifyable information about YOU. If it did, then yeah, people should start to question it. Video recording, possibly okay, since you've already got 100 other people recording with their own eyes. Video analysis and preemptive action? Not okay. Heart rate monitor's to determine if someone is "likely" to freak out, throw up, or blow the thing up, not okay. Again, it comes down to expectation of privacy I'm like a broken record. It's like mind-control. You say it enough and people might actually start to believe it. Screw that it's true and the real issue, say it enough and it BECOMES truth. I mean look at Bush And sorry, please don't label that left-winged. I feel the same about democrat politicians. It's just easier and more passionate right now since the right control so much, well and the fact Bush is by and large an insane liar.
Now as far as PERSONAL aircraft are concerned, that's a little trickier. The reason? Because it's more elitest currently. And yeah, that does make a difference. Whether actually or just socially, it doesn't matter. It simply IS and that's what we have to deal with. I think the main difference to support devices like these in aircraft opposed to land-favoring craft is the inherit ease of screwing up. I'd imagine it's a lot easier to get off track in your twin-prop trying to follow the imaginary white and yellow lines in the sky than it is to veer off course (under full mental capacity, ie. no freaking CELL phone glued to your ear) in a car. And I'm willing to bet you that 9 times out of 10, those people really REALLY want whatever information they can get to be recorded or otherwise so they can figure out how they're going to remain alive. Besides, my God, if you have some jet crash smack on into a mountain, I'm pretty dang sure the person owning that plane is going to want to know what the hell happened? The manufacturer might not of course The difference here is the black box device is more likely than not going to be the only piece of reckage that CAN be used to determine what happened.
That there my friend is the ultimate difference and something I touched on in my previous post. We have a tried and true? scientific method for analyzing an auto crash. We can do it! In the same light the GrandAm example is a champion for showing their usefullness in a real test example, we seem to overlook something. Our own real analysis shows the guy was insane too! 333% over the speed limit! By golly, it doesn't seem like we even NEED these devices. Our own scientist's are already doing a bang up job. In this case, maybe personal freedom and a right to privacy can take precedence (again, horrible spelling perhaps) over a duplication of services these black boxes claim to provide. And if we argue they should replace our human element efforts, phew. You're really in for a mess of hurt for a whole lot of civil cases against person's, the government, and who knows what else.
An aircraft however, I am not aware of a reliable, or even estimatable method investigator's can use to determine that this heap of scrap was going 200 MPH opposed to 280MPH when it hit the side of the mountain. All they know it, well it used to be a LearJet XXX or whatever. But that's only because they were able to piece together the 10 pieces of fuselage that had the aircraft lettering embedded on them. You know, if we ever get to the point that most automobile accidents annihilate a license plate into 10 pieces, I think it may be time to reconsider this whole black box idea. Hell, it'd be time to reconsider transportation.
I guess I am sorta opposed to these critters. Amazingly I wasn't until I started typing/thinking more about it. When I originally read an article outlining the same GrandAm accident in my C&D magazine, I thought those guys were being a little over-reactive. But now I understand why