Right before you hit

March 19, 2001 5:25 PM

Right before you hit you were doing... Looks like we're all getting black boxes in our cars. As a high speed crash survivor I have to admit a certain curiosity as to the forces involved my accident happened. But I'm not sure I want to know this badly...
posted by daver (10 comments total)

I'm thinking this has fairly major implications for auto insurance companies and police departments, and of course drivers. Apparently the thing only buffers the last 5 seconds of data, so it doesn't seem like this'd be a speed enforcement tool.

On the otherhand, how much are your insurance rates going to go up if you didn't even have your foot on the break when you rear ended that guy in the pinto.
posted by daver at 5:34 PM on March 19, 2001

hmm, looks like my 1984 toyota truck is looking better and better!

But really, how hard would it be to "accidently" get your black box disconnected?
posted by Hackworth at 7:24 PM on March 19, 2001

Kerr said the company’s $2,495 decoder has been used by police forces around the U.S.

Wow, sounds like this company is making a fortune. Why don't the car companies develop something that has a USB-out jack and provide some software for the police departments to put on PCs they already have instead of paying ridiculous prices to use some proprietary hardware. Wow.
posted by daveadams at 8:21 PM on March 19, 2001

A computer plus the proprietary, vertical-market software required to make use of the data would probably cost about the same anyway. And it would be far more susceptible to tampering. The data is evidence; it needs to be protected in some way.
posted by kindall at 8:33 PM on March 19, 2001

I hope they combine these things with GPS, give them long memories, and put them into every vehicle on the road.
posted by pracowity at 1:47 AM on March 20, 2001

A computer plus the proprietary, vertical-market software required to make use of the data would probably cost about the same anyway.

Well, see, though, they already have computers. That was my point. And the car companies may as well provide the interpretation software to the police departments for free (well, I can see a hundred reasons why maybe they wouldn't...).

it would be far more susceptible to tampering. The data is evidence; it needs to be protected in some way.

This is a good argument, too good for my original whine. So you win. Good job, kindall. Of course, if generic computers start coming with CPRM built in to every component, maybe they would be able to keep the data securely. ;)
posted by daveadams at 7:52 AM on March 20, 2001

Software manufacturers, music publishers, and other copyright-based entities have long had an attitude that "we own the stuff, we're just letting you use it". This recording device sounds like a move in that direction for auto manufacturers: they don't trust me to drive my own car safely, so they're going to put an electronic nanny in it just in case.

Hmmm... I wonder how long I can keep my '86 Suzuki going?

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 3:05 PM on March 20, 2001

> I wonder how long I can keep my '86 Suzuki going?

They could require you to retrofit the device in any vehicle driven on public roads.
posted by pracowity at 10:54 PM on March 20, 2001

They could, but given that they don't require old vehicles to be retrofitted with shoulder belts, airbags, or even catalytic converters, they probably won't.
posted by kindall at 11:32 PM on March 20, 2001

But you might retrofit it if it meant your insurance would fall to almost zero.
posted by pracowity at 2:24 AM on March 25, 2001