3 ms·

I dont think giving the government the power to force by law people record their movement, operating conditions, and other factors is inline with spirit of cons

I dont think giving the government the power to force by law people record their movement, operating conditions, and other factors is inline with spirit of constitution. Sure it makes it easy to "determining fault in an accident" but same could be said if everyone was required to wear a body cam, or install surveillance camera's in their home that the police monitor 24x7. I am opposed to any and all government mandated surveillance, I do not want to live in the surveillance state we do, I sure as hell do not want to see it expanded I also reject the narrative that another commenter basically claims, one of "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear", that old trope has been proven through out history to be moronic statement

bkallus 3y ago
I care very much about privacy. I use only free and open source software on my personal and work computers, as well as my phone and router. I do not use social media, except for this site. I do not connect anything to my network that I do not control. For this reason, I don't have a smart TV, smart speakers, or smart appliances. I drive a car from 2009 with no cellular connection or GPS unit. I agree that the "nothing to hide" argument is weak. I am opposed to indiscriminate government surveillance. This is not that. I have seen what it looks like when this data is used as evidence in court. The EDR provides information about the driver's last inputs to the car, and it has a very small amount of storage. The data is only accessible through physical access to the unit. In the event of a fatal accident, there are very few sources of information: - Survivors (biased) - Witnesses (not always present) - Forensics (squishy) - EDR data The EDR is a crucial source of truth for determining the cause of an accident. When you drive on busy roads, you are taking others' lives into your hands. In the event of a serious accident, it's critical that the details of the seconds before the accident are available to inform legal decisions. If we remove the EDR, we are left only with less reliable sources of information. I do not support making black boxes mandatory because it feels like it violates the 5th Amendment. I will also never purchase a car without one, because I think it is more likely to prevent harm than cause it.

bkallus 3y ago

I care very much about privacy. I use only free and open source software on my personal and work computers, as well as my phone and router. I do not use social media, except for this site. I do not connect anything to my network that I do not control. For this reason, I don't have a smart TV, smart speakers, or smart appliances. I drive a car from 2009 with no cellular connection or GPS unit. I agree that the "nothing to hide" argument is weak. I am opposed to indiscriminate government surveillance. This is not that. I have seen what it looks like when this data is used as evidence in court. The EDR provides information about the driver's last inputs to the car, and it has a very small amount of storage. The data is only accessible through physical access to the unit. In the event of a fatal accident, there are very few sources of information: - Survivors (biased) - Witnesses (not always present) - Forensics (squishy) - EDR data The EDR is a crucial source of truth for determining the cause of an accident. When you drive on busy roads, you are taking others' lives into your hands. In the event of a serious accident, it's critical that the details of the seconds before the accident are available to inform legal decisions. If we remove the EDR, we are left only with less reliable sources of information. I do not support making black boxes mandatory because it feels like it violates the 5th Amendment. I will also never purchase a car without one, because I think it is more likely to prevent harm than cause it.