The older I get, the less awesome this seems.
The older I get, the less awesome this seems.
Curmudgeon wrote: Anybody who believes this part: This data does not include personal details about the driver or vehicle, the DOT said. Vehicles or a group of vehicles can be identified through a defined procedure "only if there is a need to fix a safety problem." deserves what they get. I won't have one of those insurance company plug ins, for instance.
Yeah, right. Fix a safety problem. "Sir, we're going to have to ask you to step out of the vehicle. We need to ... uh ... fix a safety problem" I don't berkeleying buy it for a second. 
I just got some mail from my insurance company saying that if I voluntarily submitted to one of those.. my insurance could go down.. and it probably would.. but I am not plugging one into my car
mad_machine wrote: I just got some mail from my insurance company saying that if I voluntarily submitted to one of those.. my insurance could go down.. and it probably would.. but I am not plugging one into my car
Plug it in only for track days.
So what happens with older cars that don't have this technology?
93EXCivic wrote: So what happens with older cars that don't have this technology?
Banned for being "unsafe" and a danger to the public welfare.
Resistance is futile...
Shhh! The government is closer than you think!
With all the push for self driving cars, its something thats going to have to be put forth some time. I am leery about what law enforcement might do with it. (insta-speeding ticket) Although, most of that comes from how I feel about speed limits being artificially low for revenue purposes. Not to mention insurance companies... (but then again, most cars now already have EDR black boxes)
1988RedT2 wrote:93EXCivic wrote: So what happens with older cars that don't have this technology?Banned for being "unsafe" and a danger to the public welfare. Resistance is futile...
Not to drop a floater, but we were discussing this on the show. I'm assuming they will be detected by lidar and the information will be shared between communicating carss. Just a guess.
Your Car "Faster faster faster"
Police Car "Hello civilian car, how fast did your driver have you going?"
Your Car "We were at 120 and climbing about a mile before where you were sitting, not bad for a hybrid that only produces water and smugness"
Police Car "Yes that was very fast."
Police Car interface "Suspect vehicle recorded 120 within acceptable range by vehicle data system"
Officer to you: "Sir please step out of the car."
And people wonder why I want to buy a bigger boat and sail off someplace warm, sunny, and 3rd world for the rest of my life
Goes outside and pats his 87 4Runner and thanks it for letting him drive it.
The last couple of cars I bought barely had EFI. I'll past on the overly complicated, overly expensive, overly intrusive, overly regulated, auto industry.
I'm a big boy, I really don't need to be saved from myself. Thanks anyways.
Im searching craigslist for a Conestoga wagon.
mad_machine wrote: And people wonder why I want to buy a bigger boat and sail off someplace warm, sunny, and 3rd world for the rest of my life
Have worked peripherally with this technology for approaching 3 years. It's for passive warnings triggered by GPS, wireless connectivity, etc.
Not quite as heinous as some of you are fearing. Has nothing to do with autonomous vehicle programs, and the systems can do nothing more than provide visual/auditory/haptic feedback. You're still entitled to not heed the warnings and plow into things as you see fit. ;-)
The warnings are comparable and complimentary to alerts from radar-based blind spot, collision, etc. warnings already in production. Radar has its strengths; this system has its strengths.
Overview of the system: https://vimeo.com/45533527
Drat, someone beat me to the Ron Swanson reference...
I'm not sure they'll ban the old cars for being 'unsafe', after all, there are plenty of legal cars from the 60's with no seat belts and no structural integrity that are a light rear ending away from turning into balls of fire.
I'm more worried if the current bliss and crash auto brake can detect motorcycles......I never noticed the red light on the mirror(of vehicles I know had BLISS) when I was beside them on the bike.....
jde wrote: Have worked peripherally with this technology for approaching 3 years. It's for passive warnings triggered by GPS, wireless connectivity, etc. Not quite as heinous as some of you are fearing. Has nothing to do with autonomous vehicle programs, and the systems can do nothing more than provide visual/auditory/haptic feedback. You're still entitled to not heed the warnings and plow into things as you see fit. ;-) The warnings are comparable and complimentary to alerts from radar-based blind spot, collision, etc. warnings already in production. Radar has its strengths; this system has its strengths. Overview of the system: https://vimeo.com/45533527
it's a slippery slope thing.. there's already too much nanny state crap in cars as it is, and they just want to keep adding more and more... until eventually it's illegal to drive your cars or use them for anything but transportation from point A to point B, and only if you have a good reason for going there..
i own the oldest car in my family. i intend to keep it that way. that is all.
-J0N
Sometimes the internet makes me feel like I'm a kid again listening to my Dad and uncles talk about how fuel injection and "Cadillac" converters were going to be the downfall of cars/trucks. My dad swore he was keeping his 69 GMC beater forever (4 wheel manual drums and all. "If a man don't have time to clean and adjust every 1000 miles he shouldn't be driving").
That truck has been gone at least 25 years.
novaderrik wrote:jde wrote: Have worked peripherally with this technology for approaching 3 years. It's for passive warnings triggered by GPS, wireless connectivity, etc. Not quite as heinous as some of you are fearing. Has nothing to do with autonomous vehicle programs, and the systems can do nothing more than provide visual/auditory/haptic feedback. You're still entitled to not heed the warnings and plow into things as you see fit. ;-) The warnings are comparable and complimentary to alerts from radar-based blind spot, collision, etc. warnings already in production. Radar has its strengths; this system has its strengths. Overview of the system: https://vimeo.com/45533527it's a slippery slope thing.. there's already too much nanny state crap in cars as it is, and they just want to keep adding more and more... until eventually it's illegal to drive your cars or use them for anything but transportation from point A to point B, and only if you have a good reason for going there..
If you really believe that, you should commute with a car that uses a hand crank. That way all of the safety items are not on the car at all- crank starter (broken hands), all weel brakes, disk brakes, safety glass, seat belts- none of that sissy stuff anymore. No point in even considering a car with a glue in laminated windshield, or any kind of crash structure, or reliable fuelling and ignition systems....
World is always coming to an end.... In a billion years, when the sun is so big that it envelopes the world, that may happen.
yamaha wrote: I'm more worried if the current bliss and crash auto brake can detect motorcycles......I never noticed the red light on the mirror(of vehicles I know had BLISS) when I was beside them on the bike.....
Rear quarter blind spot detection on our '14 Mazda 6 certainly does. As well as individuals walking in a parking lot while backing out. Can't say about the other cars...
Sky_Render wrote: My cars already talk to me. Why are you looking at me like that?
SAY WHAT?????
When I took apart the datsun wagon I should have kept that tiny record player. 
You'll need to log in to post.
