Volvo Will Use In-Car Cameras To Detect Drunk, Distracted Driving
https://www.motor1.com/news/314529/volvo-in-car-cameras-drunk-driving/
I was reading about this. Corporate big brother is enveloping us on many fronts. I'm not sure how many people want to be policed by the products they buy.
Quote from: dazzleman on March 23, 2019, 02:02:36 PM
I was reading about this. Corporate big brother is enveloping us on many fronts. I'm not sure how many people want to be policed by the products they buy.
Better than being killed or maimed by them, or so some would say :lol:.
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 23, 2019, 04:00:37 PM
Better than being killed or maimed by them, or so some would say :lol:.
:lol:
It's an interesting question. I worry about mission creep with something like this, in which the car is reporting lots of data to some outside source, so that we are constantly being monitored. I realize that we've already gone pretty far down that road, but I fear that we are waking up into a totalitarian nightmare in the near future, all in the name of safety and security. I like safety of course, but I don't think safety is the most important thing in life, and I don't think we'll be very safe on a broader basis when we are so vulnerable to bad actors (which could be our government) using that information against us.
Then there's this:
https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/03/21/online-posting-dangerous-selfies-insurance-coverage/
Tech Experts: What You Post Online Could Be Directly Impacting Your Insurance Coverage
March 21, 2019 at 6:32 pmFiled Under:Insurance, Insurance Company, Local TV, Natalie Duddridge, New York, Selfies
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — What insurance policy holders do in their daily lives may not be so private.
If you're posting any information publicly online, your insurance company could be using it to determine your coverage, CBS2's Natalie Duddridge reported Thursday.
Posing in front of a great white shark and dangling your feet out the side of a helicopter — those types of pictures may get you likes on Instagram, but only dislikes from your insurance company, which could consider it dangerous, tech experts say.
"Especially for claims, they look into social media, looking to see if someone's driving a motorcycle without a helmet or posting pictures drinking and smoking," said Duarte Pereira, senior VP of FitechGelb.
Experts say searching your online presence could become a standard practice of the insurance underwriting process that could affect life insurance, car insurance, home insurance, and even pet insurance.
College student David Karnauch took this selfie on an unauthorized section of the Brooklyn Bridge. (Credit: David Karnauch)
For example, posting while driving could label you as a distracted driver and impact your policy renewal. By sharing your family's vacation online, insurers could claim you put your home at risk to burglars. Even snapping a selfie with your new dog without disclosing the pet could affect your home insurance, CBS2's Duddridge reported.
"Variables like pets can impact your underwriting, especially certain breeds of pets," said Sean Kevelighan, CEO of the Insurance Information Institute. "The one thing we encourage the customer to know and to do is to ask questions of their insurer."
In January, New York state issued new guidelines to protect consumers and requires insurers to prove when social media data use is justified.
"Nowadays, everybody just post a selfie without knowing what could happen," resident Alfredo Rodriguez said.
"We need to be careful about what we post to social media, anyway. That's the reason I don't use Facebook at all," Ananya Restogi said.
But tech experts say there may actually be a few things you can do to clean up or reverse your profile.
"Posting things like running a marathon or doing exercise," Pereira said.
That is, if you're looking to improve your life insurance coverage, not if you claimed an injury. But most importantly, insurers say always be honest with your providers.
Insurers say, especially if you filed an injury claim, no pictures should be popping up of you parasailing or skydiving.
It's horrible; the big brother creep all around us. I can't stand it. And it's becoming worse year after year. I never put my cell phone on the WiFi network of my work. They monitor everything. My parents had some sort of monitor in their car from State Farm Insurance which gave them a discount on their auto insurance depending on how many miles they drove or something like that. I threw it out when they came to visit.
Quote from: veeman on March 23, 2019, 08:29:04 PM
My parents had some sort of monitor in their car from State Farm Insurance which gave them a discount on their auto insurance depending on how many miles they drove or something like that. I threw it out when they came to visit.
Eventually the frog'll be thoroughly boiled, and we'll be penalized if we don't put them in our cars...
Quote from: Laconian on March 24, 2019, 12:05:40 AM
Eventually the frog'll be thoroughly boiled, and we'll be penalized if we don't put them in our cars...
I'll figure out a way to install it in a fake car that just sits in the driveway all the time
Quote from: veeman on March 23, 2019, 08:29:04 PM
It's horrible; the big brother creep all around us. I can't stand it. And it's becoming worse year after year. I never put my cell phone on the WiFi network of my work. They monitor everything. My parents had some sort of monitor in their car from State Farm Insurance which gave them a discount on their auto insurance depending on how many miles they drove or something like that. I threw it out when they came to visit.
My brother had the State Farm monitoring device. He said he got some kind of discount for using it for some period of time. I was never offered it, but would have refused it if I had been. I don't think the discount is worth it. And surely it would work against me if I used it for any period of time, since I like to take it up to 85 mph or so on the highway when I can and that would surely be detected.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 24, 2019, 12:08:32 AM
I'll figure out a way to install it in a fake car that just sits in the driveway all the time
Smart move!
Quote from: Laconian on March 24, 2019, 12:05:40 AM
Eventually the frog'll be thoroughly boiled, and we'll be penalized if we don't put them in our cars...
That's what I fear. It starts out as voluntary, but eventually our cars will be reporting back to somebody on everything that we do, and there won't be any choice. The Volvo monitoring is a step in that direction.
Connecticut is now talking about bringing back tolls, as the neighboring states have, but rather than periodic toll booths, there will be gantries at regular intervals that will photograph the license plate numbers, so it will possible to monitor where a car has been driven. Of course, it will be possible to calculate average speed by distance and time. That capability already exists on roads like the Mass Pike and the New Jersey Turnpike. Luckily, they don't use it yet, but who knows for how long? When I drive the Mass Pike, let's just say that I arrive at the exit toll gantry well before I am supposed to, if I were to drive at the speed limit. I can see that calculation being made and the driver assessed a fine based on it. For me, it's a game and that makes it too easy for them to catch me. I like the current rules better.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 24, 2019, 12:08:32 AM
I'll figure out a way to install it in a fake car that just sits in the driveway all the time
Now pretend that can get you a $10,000 fine because you "defeated a safety device", or something. Would you still do it?
Quote from: dazzleman on March 24, 2019, 05:45:05 AM
That's what I fear. It starts out as voluntary, but eventually our cars will be reporting back to somebody on everything that we do, and there won't be any choice. The Volvo monitoring is a step in that direction.
Connecticut is now talking about bringing back tolls, as the neighboring states have, but rather than periodic toll booths, there will be gantries at regular intervals that will photograph the license plate numbers, so it will possible to monitor where a car has been driven. Of course, it will be possible to calculate average speed by distance and time. That capability already exists on roads like the Mass Pike and the New Jersey Turnpike. Luckily, they don't use it yet, but who knows for how long? When I drive the Mass Pike, let's just say that I arrive at the exit toll gantry well before I am supposed to, if I were to drive at the speed limit. I can see that calculation being made and the driver assessed a fine based on it. For me, it's a game and that makes it too easy for them to catch me. I like the current rules better.
Ugh, that's soul sucking.
Quote from: Laconian on March 24, 2019, 12:35:34 PM
Now pretend that can get you a $10,000 fine because you "defeated a safety device", or something. Would you still do it?
Hooray El Caminos
I for one am not looking forward to the cars of the future that are only a simple over the air update away from being completely and totally out of our control. Sounds depressing.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 26, 2019, 08:31:46 AM
I for one am not looking forward to the cars of the future that are only a simple over the air update away from being completely and totally out of our control. Sounds depressing.
You can always get yourself a 60s muscle car and experience real thrill of driving. I state this from personal experience. Other than having to appear somewhat responsible and yielding to "She who must be obeyed", I'd have one myself. :(
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 08:41:41 AM
You can always get yourself a 60s muscle car and experience real thrill of driving. I state this from personal experience. Other than having to appear somewhat responsible and yielding to "She who must be obeyed", I'd have one myself. :(
A 1986 Suzuki Samurai will do the same thing for you, while appearing less testosterone-ragey and more cute.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on March 26, 2019, 09:13:04 AM
A 1986 Suzuki Samurai will do the same thing for you, while appearing less testosterone-ragey and more cute.
An M2 will do the same while being actually useful in more ways than going straight. And it has a backup camera.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on March 26, 2019, 09:13:04 AM
A 1986 Suzuki Samurai will do the same thing for you, while appearing less testosterone-ragey and more cute.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 26, 2019, 09:17:52 AM
An M2 will do the same while being actually useful in more ways than going straight. And it has a backup camera.
You are completely missing the point, too much power, too much noise, too little brakes, skinny tires, inadequate suspension, it all adds up to thrills; and you can't substitute the smell of raw gasoline with stinky exhaust.
The most fun I had driving was in my '67 Sunbeam Tiger Mk.II with a HiPo 289.
No no, you're missing the point. I don't want that stuff :lol:
A car that is exciting because it is under developed/tired with a terrible suspension and stinks up a storm as it goes about being terrible doesn't sound too great.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 26, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
No no, you're missing the point. I don't want that stuff :lol:
A car that is exciting because it is under developed/tired with a terrible suspension and stinks up a storm as it goes about being terrible doesn't sound too great.
I see, you want to be coddled; but not too coddled. :lol:
I'd say that's a very fair assessment. I want my AC, backup camera, a car that stays together, but I also want to be able to turn off the nannies and shift my own gears.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 26, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
No no, you're missing the point. I don't want that stuff :lol:
A car that is exciting because it is under developed/tired with a terrible suspension and stinks up a storm as it goes about being terrible doesn't sound too great.
+1. Not all thrills are good thrills.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on March 26, 2019, 10:04:33 AM
+1. Not all thrills are good thrills.
In respect to vehicles, it's more a matter of whether you drive the car or the car drives itself. Most modern vehicles attempt to disconnect the driver from the visceral experience of driving which is fine, because most people don't want that experience.
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 09:33:19 AM
You are completely missing the point, too much power, too much noise, too little brakes, skinny tires, inadequate suspension, it all adds up to thrills; and you can't substitute the smell of raw gasoline with stinky exhaust.
The most fun I had driving was in my '67 Sunbeam Tiger Mk.II with a HiPo 289.
Suzuki Samurai: meets all requirements. To clarify, any power is too much power.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 26, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
No no, you're missing the point. I don't want that stuff :lol:
A car that is exciting because it is under developed/tired with a terrible suspension and stinks up a storm as it goes about being terrible doesn't sound too great.
That's what restomods are for. Modern tires and suspension but no nannies and way more connection to the road.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 26, 2019, 12:10:50 PM
That's what restomods are for. Modern tires and suspension but no nannies and way more connection to the road.
Yeah, so they can cruise at 30 mph to the next meet :lol:.
It's speed, or the perception of speed that gets my adrenaline flowing. I still remember the very first time my father let me drive the car, a '38 Ford that was about 14 years old at the time; full of rattles and loose steering. I think he might've been a little bit drunk at the time. I was about 10 or so, barely able to reach the pedals and still see out the windshield. We had a sandy lane that led to the back of the farm about a half mile long. I got it going in first and it was bouncing over the ridges and little swales in the lane and then I shifted up into second and pressed on the gas. I must've got it going almost 25 mph; it felt like I was flying. I guarantee that Wimmer going 250 kph in his Mercedes on the autobahn doesn't get the same sense of speed as I did back then. Modern cars are just too refined to get any real thrills. :huh:
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 12:52:34 PM
Yeah, so they can cruise at 30 mph to the next meet :lol:.
It's speed, or the perception of speed that gets my adrenaline flowing. I still remember the very first time my father let me drive the car, a '38 Ford that was about 14 years old at the time; full of rattles and loose steering. I think he might've been a little bit drunk at the time. I was about 10 or so, barely able to reach the pedals and still see out the windshield. We had a sandy lane that led to the back of the farm about a half mile long. I got it going in first and it was bouncing over the ridges and little swales in the lane and then I shifted up into second and pressed on the gas. I must've got it going almost 25 mph; it felt like I was flying. I guarantee that Wimmer going 250 kph in his Mercedes on the autobahn doesn't get the same sense of speed as I did back then. Modern cars are just too refined to get any real thrills. :huh:
In other words, we should all be driving modded golf carts and mopeds.
Quote from: giant_mtb on March 26, 2019, 12:56:04 PM
In other words, we should all be driving modded golf carts and mopeds.
Nah, that would be lame. It has to be big and noisy; preferably, with a V8.
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 10:17:35 AM
In respect to vehicles, it's more a matter of whether you drive the car or the car drives itself.
I was mostly making a joke that 60s muscle cars are "thrilling" in the sense that they're terrifying to drive around a corner at moderately high speeds.
There are cars without electronic nannies that are thrilling to drive and still handle and brake appropriately.
It's the rawness, not the crappiness, that makes it fun. Ariel Atoms are incredibly fun because of the direct connection to the road. You can hear everything and feel everything. Most modern cars have so much sound deadening and other insulating design features that create a bubble of numbness. Might be nice for highway cruising, but it raises the speed and G-level required to have as much fun.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on March 26, 2019, 02:01:01 PM
I was mostly making a joke that 60s muscle cars are "thrilling" in the sense that they're terrifying to drive around a corner at moderately high speeds.
There are cars without electronic nannies that are thrilling to drive and still handle and brake appropriately.
That's another point, 60s cars were thrilling to drive even at legal speeds. With modern cars, driving at legal speeds can make you want to take a nap.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 26, 2019, 02:07:18 PM
It's the rawness, not the crappiness, that makes it fun. Ariel Atoms are incredibly fun because of the direct connection to the road. You can hear everything and feel everything. Most modern cars have so much sound deadening and other insulating design features that create a bubble of numbness. Might be nice for highway cruising, but it raises the speed and G-level required to have as much fun.
True, some cars are like driving a Go Kart. I did have a couple like that, a '59 Bug Eye Sprite and a '62 MG Midget. They made you feel connected to the road because you were practically sitting on the road. They were fun, but not enough power.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 26, 2019, 02:07:18 PM
It's the rawness, not the crappiness, that makes it fun. Ariel Atoms are incredibly fun because of the direct connection to the road. You can hear everything and feel everything. Most modern cars have so much sound deadening and other insulating design features that create a bubble of numbness. Might be nice for highway cruising, but it raises the speed and G-level required to have as much fun.
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 03:24:10 PM
That's another point, 60s cars were thrilling to drive even at legal speeds. With modern cars, driving at legal speeds can make you want to take a nap.
Yeah, I get what you mean. :ohyeah:
I also sometimes forget that the S2000 is more "raw" than the vast majority of its contemporaries, and that it's not truly a modern car anymore (though obviously much more modern than a '60s muscle car).
Quote from: FoMoJo on March 26, 2019, 03:28:55 PM
True, some cars are like driving a Go Kart. I did have a couple like that, a '59 Bug Eye Sprite and a '62 MG Midget. They made you feel connected to the road because you were practically sitting on the road. They were fun, but not enough power.
Yeah, seating position is a big factor as well. The lower your head is to the ground, the greater your sensation of speed.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on March 26, 2019, 04:19:27 PM
Yeah, I get what you mean. :ohyeah:
I also sometimes forget that the S2000 is more "raw" than the vast majority of its contemporaries, and that it's not truly a modern car anymore (though obviously much more modern than a '60s muscle car).
I've never driven, or even ridden in, a S2000, but what I know of it makes me think that it is a wonderful driving experience. I would compare it to my '70 Alfa Spider for overall balance and handling. Alfa, at the time, in respect to building affordable sports cars, was way ahead of most, the exception might be the Lotus Elan. It was perfectly balanced, actually had working suspension so that your teeth didn't rattle, and enough power, in respect to weight, to make it go fast. If I was in the market for a more contemporary sports car, my first consideration would be an S2000.