Will GM Be Driving Your Next New Car?

[NitrousG35]

In a plan that sounds like it was taken right out of a page from George Orwell's 1984, GM has announced that its OnStar system which will be introduced on 2009 models, will give a "safety" feature which will allow external authorities-i.e. the police and GM, to either remotely shut a car's motor off, or at least, dial back the power. Big Brother is watching.

Here's the article:
General Motors just announced a new and improved version of its OnStar telematics system that could be used to shut your car’s engine off (or at least, cut back the power) remotely.

Touted as a "safety" feature (of course), the upgraded version of OnStar would give external authorities (law enforcement - and, of course, GM) the ability to send out a signal keyed to the car’s on board computer, which in turn would ease off the gas - no matter how hard you’re putting foot down. GPS-equipped cars already can be located in real time at any time, whether moving or stationary. The "enhanced" version of OnStar would, however, be the first use of satellite technology to physically control the vehicle/supersede the driver.

The system goes live in 2009, when GM will begin offering it on more than 1.7 million new cars and trucks. Chevrolet will lead the way - with up to 60 percent of ‘09 models fitted with "enhanced" OnStar.

So what’s wrong with the idea? Is it cabin-in-the-woods paranoia to be concerned about what, after all, could be a valuable tool for law enforcement?

The answer depends to a great extent on how much you trust the government.

Certainly, the use of "enhanced" OnStar to stop high-speed car chases and retrieve stolen cars is hard to argue with. But will that be all the technology’s used for?

Consider this:

The insurance industry is at this very moment lobbying Congress to impose electronic speed governors on heavy trucks - limiting them to no faster than 68 mph.

Surprisingly, the trucking industry isn’t completely opposed to the idea - provided electronic speed limiters are also fitted to ordinary passenger vehicles, too. Fair’s fair, right?

Now add a dash of "enhanced" OnStar to the brew.

Come 2009, it will be technically feasible to make speeding impossible. A modern car is controlled by computers; the computers are now tied into GPS systems such as OnStar - which have the ability to send and receive electronic transmissions, including instructions that tell the computer how to run the car. "Smart" speed limit signs can now be fitted with transmitters; when a car with "enhanced" OnStar comes into range, the transmitter tells the car’s computer what the maximum allowable speed shall be - and ye shall drive no faster.
Welcome to the future.

"Technology should not just entertain us or make us more comfortable," croons NHTSA Administrator Nicole R. Nason. "It should make us safer." Of course. And what could be safer than making speeding an impossibility? If you haven’t heard this argument voiced openly, just wait. It’s coming as sure as Lindsay Lohan’s next DWI. The safety nags have been patiently waiting for years for technology to catch up to their agenda.

Courtesy of GM, that day has arrived.

Our friends in the insurance and safety lobbies will soon be urging that this "optional" technology become a mandatory feature on every new car. Speeding is illegal - right? Who is going to argue in favor of allowing the automakers to continue building and selling cars capable of being driven 30, 40, 50 mph faster than the highest lawfully allowable maximum?

What about the children, after all?

And if that’s not alarming enough, consider the likely follow-up. Once all new cars are fitted with in-car speed nannies, the glassy eye of government will very likely turn its gaze upon older cars - especially older pre-computer cars, which can’t be electronically controlled because there is no on-board electronic controller. The old car hobby is already (justly) alarmed by recent changes in antique/classic car licensing and registration laws - which are making it harder and more expensive to keep an older car on the road.

In Virginia, for example, changes to the laws governing antique vehicle registration now empower police to conduct what amount to "road-side safety checks." If the cop decides your antique vehicle doesn’t meet this or that jot or tittle of the law, he can seize your plates on the spot and have your antique vehicle towed to the impound lot - notwithstanding that most cops don’t have any specific knowledge of what is/isn’t "right" about decades-old vehicles.

Now the authorities have a new tool in their kit. A cudgel by which they cannot only beat speeders into submission - but which could very well be used to take older cars off the road forever. Consider yourself warned.

And remember to say "thanks, GM."

http://www.motorists.org/blog/speed-...-next-new-car/

[dobiejoe]

Nice find

[mattsbobo]

Damn! Good post. I would hope that the Government wouldn't permit them to put a speed cap on all cars. I would like to think that the people would revolt, and stand up against "The Man". I also never liked the idea of Onstar. True, it can be a lifesaver in a pinch, but that's just a little too close to Big Brother watching me for my taste.

[raycl]

Look up OBD-3. All cars now are OBD-2, and the third version has been argued (queitly) for a few years.

[BigT]

Because the people in government obviously know better than everyone else how to live our lives. It is so obvious that we would all kill ourselves if the government didn't step in to hold our hands. /End sarcasm.

There is a need for rules and regulations. But there is a point where you are no longer providing necessary safety regulations and are simply telling people how to live their lives. I think the government crossed this line in many areas already. We'll see if this ends up being another place where they step way over the line.

[MutantCheese]

I knew this was coming. Onstar already creeps me out.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by mattsbobo

Damn! Good post. I would hope that the Government wouldn't permit them to put a speed cap on all cars. I would like to think that the people would revolt, and stand up against "The Man". I also never liked the idea of Onstar. True, it can be a lifesaver in a pinch, but that's just a little too close to Big Brother watching me for my taste.

Right now I don't think Onstar is really a problem. I know several people who have it. It is there to make GM money, and if you aren't paying for it they aren't going to use it. But if the government steps in and regulates or makes any of it mandatory that will change. At this point maybe they are watching maybe they aren't. But it certainly hasn't caused any problems for any of the people I know who have it....yet.

[RCKola1011]

There is no way they will put transmitters in every single speed limit sign anytime during my lifetime. Just like they wont change all the signs from miles to kilometers, they wont install transmitters in all US speed limit signs.

I think you could come up with some good arguments for when speed limiting would be dangerous.

[cation]

yet another reason NOT to buy a GM car... stupid...

[BigT]

Originally Posted by cation

yet another reason NOT to buy a GM car... stupid...

It most likely won't be as bad a people speculate it could be. The only way it would be bad is if the government started regulating it and mandated that all cars have it. Then it wouldn't matter what car you buy. I think as long as GM is controlling it and using it as a way to make money they can't do to many things with it that piss people off because they are in it to make money.

If the government gets involved then it becomes a problem because they will use it to control you life under the guise that they are trying to keep you safe.

[cation]

Originally Posted by BigT

It most likely won't be as bad a people speculate it could be. The only way it would be bad is if the government started regulating it and mandated that all cars have it. Then it wouldn't matter what car you buy. I think as long as GM is controlling it and using it as a way to make money they can't do to many things with it that piss people off because they are in it to make money.

If the government gets involved then it becomes a problem because they will use it to control you life under the guise that they are trying to keep you safe.

Yeah, I know... It just bugs me to think about what it could turn into... especially if they do it slow and gradually so that the general public doesn't take notice as to what is happening around them behind the scenes...

[BigT]

Originally Posted by cation

Yeah, I know... It just bugs me to think about what it could turn into... especially if they do it slow and gradually so that the general public doesn't take notice as to what is happening around them behind the scenes...

Slow, incremental changes is definitely how they get people to go along with it. Then one day you wake up and realise they control your life in ways that would have caused revolt if they had suddenly sprung it on people all at once years ago.

[_Viper_]

Im not bying a GM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dentrecords]

I bet a double standard would apply to law enforcement vehicles, who routinely exceed the speed limit to a point that you'd lose your license if you were a civilian driver doing the same thing..

Land of the free, eh?

This is all speculation of course, but it's a bit disturbing seeing this company trying to exert more control over what you can and cannot do with the vehicle you purchased...

[NitrousG35]

Originally Posted by dentrecords

I bet a double standard would apply to law enforcement vehicles, who routinely exceed the speed limit to a point that you'd lose your license if you were a civilian driver doing the same thing..

Land of the free, eh?

This is all speculation of course, but it's a bit disturbing seeing this company trying to exert more control over what you can and cannot do with the vehicle you purchased...

As another member mentioned, OBD-3 is on its way. This will give the same capability to all auto manufacturers. The ramifications are startling. If law enforcement can access this, we can all be controlled. This is definitely a First Amendment issue. The ACLU is already contemplating ways to combat this.

The future seems a little scary and uncertain. With the EU and certainly Congress in the future limiting the Carbon Dioxide signature of vehicles, high performance cars may become a thing of the past. Add to this the possibility of law enforcement using OBD-3 coupled with GPS positioning, and a driver will be coerced into total compliance and submission.

We are entering a brave, new world where amazingly, technology may be our worst enemy. Meanwhile, freedom loving people mourn the loss of civil rights.

[mattsbobo]

Well, I'm going to have this FG2 for a long time, so good luck getting me to comply to a standard that would apply to newer cars.

[NitrousG35]

Originally Posted by mattsbobo

Well, I'm going to have this FG2 for a long time, so good luck getting me to comply to a standard that would apply to newer cars.

Matt, read this part from the article:

And if that’s not alarming enough, consider the likely follow-up. Once all new cars are fitted with in-car speed nannies, the glassy eye of government will very likely turn its gaze upon older cars - especially older pre-computer cars, which can’t be electronically controlled because there is no on-board electronic controller. The old car hobby is already (justly) alarmed by recent changes in antique/classic car licensing and registration laws - which are making it harder and more expensive to keep an older car on the road.

In Virginia, for example, changes to the laws governing antique vehicle registration now empower police to conduct what amount to "road-side safety checks." If the cop decides your antique vehicle doesn’t meet this or that jot or tittle of the law, he can seize your plates on the spot and have your antique vehicle towed to the impound lot - notwithstanding that most cops don’t have any specific knowledge of what is/isn’t "right" about decades-old vehicles.

[sh33t_0f_p4p3r]

awsome no more speeding tickets = that much less money for cops! just what we need! less money for police!!! [end]lie

[Slowroll90]

the problem is (imo) that the government is creeping away from democracy and we are letting it happen. the people in power are making decisions with no real opposition from us.
this is one step closer to socialism(i believe may be wrong)

[gx4th]

To initiate the vehicle slow down feature, the customer first has to communicate with onstar and say their auto's been stolen.

After that, onstar notifies the authorities and patrols will be on the lookout for that particular vehicle.

Upon sighting the auto, police trail it until it's deemed safe to initiate the slow down procedure. The vehicle slows, the driver still has full control of every other driving system such as brakes, steering, etc.

Look, all I can say is that these incidents are treated with respect and care. They're all logged at the call centres and if there's been abuse of the system there's certainly grounds for legal action.

Yes, it's big brother in a way, but there's no way the onstar call centers can monitor EVERY GM vehicle and sadistically slow it down to speed limit.

Why am I sticking up for GM? I work for a GM supplier and I can tell you right now there's no freakin available manpower to individually track every auto and govern the speed like a stalinist. It's not cost effective to hire and maintain enough manpower/equipment to do such a thing.

Is it right or wrong? It's clearly a feature that will be stated to the customer should they want onstar service. It's the customer's choice, still, to have it or not. They will know upfront what the feature is designed to do and the limits of it.

That's it, feel free to bash/berate now