trashbat wrote:On the face of it, eCall seems like a good idea to me.
jont wrote:trashbat wrote:On the face of it, eCall seems like a good idea to me.
Yes, if the scope is contained to its original intended purpose. The problem is that once you have these devices required in all cars, it's very hard to prevent future scope creep.
Mind you, with the pervasive CCTV and ANPR in the UK, any idea of privacy about where a car goes is long since dead
trashbat wrote:eCall has real potential to save lives in remote or off-peak accidents, especially single vehicle ones.
It does pose interesting questions about resources and infrastructure though. If my car autonomously reports that I might have crashed in the middle of the Scottish Highlands, who is going to investigate, and what if it's a false positive? And if I really have crashed but I'm in a mobile signal blackspot, I might die, whereas if the network coverage had been slightly better, I might live, which has always been the case of course but is now brought sharply into focus.
jont wrote:And please don't give me the "but if it only saves one life it will have been worth it" argument...
jont wrote:/besides, won't all the autonomous technology being foisted on us by car manufacturers mean cars won't be crashing anyway, so it's all a huge waste of money? It's not being mandated as retrofit...
trashbat wrote:jont wrote:And please don't give me the "but if it only saves one life it will have been worth it" argument...
You balance improved quality of life with potential for misuse all the time. Your mobile phone can be used to track your location, and worse, but you presumably accept that risk because it's of low value, because it's something we deal with later in a secondary battle over privacy, and because the benefits outweigh it. So it will be if enough people are saved or aided by this system.
Ancient wrote:trashbat wrote:jont wrote:And please don't give me the "but if it only saves one life it will have been worth it" argument...
You balance improved quality of life with potential for misuse all the time. Your mobile phone can be used to track your location, and worse, but you presumably accept that risk because it's of low value, because it's something we deal with later in a secondary battle over privacy, and because the benefits outweigh it. So it will be if enough people are saved or aided by this system.
If our governments tried to impose the conditions that Google Playstore imposes, we would hear huge outcries and probably street protests; because it is a commercial international conglomerate which can listen to or watch us at any time and use any of our personal information it holds for any purpose ... it becomes acceptable to most and a sign of ludditism to object. I personally find this modern attitude strange (it would not be strange to Orwell however).
Ancient wrote:If our governments tried to impose the conditions that Google Playstore imposes, we would hear huge outcries and probably street protests; because it is a commercial international conglomerate which can listen to or watch us at any time and use any of our personal information it holds for any purpose ... it becomes acceptable to most and a sign of ludditism to object. I personally find this modern attitude strange (it would not be strange to Orwell however).
StressedDave wrote:jont wrote:And please don't give me the "but if it only saves one life it will have been worth it" argument...
Unfortunately that's how politicians have to work. Or as it was put to me "Which mother are we going to tell her son died because the technology wasn't there?" Politician don't give a stuff about personal freedom if they can save a life and, reduced to brass tacks, that's what most of us think. Or to put it another way "How many people are you prepared to kill (or let die if that offends your sensibilities) because your personal data is stored somewhere and sold to the highest bidder."
StressedDave wrote:jont wrote:And please don't give me the "but if it only saves one life it will have been worth it" argument...
Unfortunately that's how politicians have to work. Or as it was put to me "Which mother are we going to tell her son died because the technology wasn't there?" Politician don't give a stuff about personal freedom if they can save a life and, reduced to brass tacks, that's what most of us think. Or to put it another way "How many people are you prepared to kill (or let die if that offends your sensibilities) because your personal data is stored somewhere and sold to the highest bidder."
TripleS wrote:If I thought the Conservative party could be relied upon to veto this nonsense, they might have a chance of receiving my vote next week, but I expect they will be largely in support of it, in which case my 50 years of Conservative support will end.
Return to General Car Chat Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests