Mandatory "Event Data Recorders" will even know you're speeding in reverse.

[Vlad]

Your privacy is in more danger form the smartphone sitting in your pocket, than from the proposed car data loggers.

Of course. There are several ways to deal with that problem though, from not owning one to having it turned off or shielded when not in use to... Also, smart phones are not mandatory.

The cheapest 7-11 prepaid phone bought with cash for you by a kid you never met that wears a hoodie easily defies all useful surveillance, identification and tracking. Cell tower triangulation does not work nearly as well as CSI would have us believe and a phone with no battery in it is impossible to locate.

[Rob MacLennan]

Of course. There are several ways to deal with that problem though, from not owning one to having it turned off or shielded when not in use to... Also, smart phones are not mandatory.

The cheapest 7-11 prepaid phone bought with cash for you by a kid you never met that wears a hoodie easily defies all useful surveillance, identification and tracking. Cell tower triangulation does not work nearly as well as CSI would have us believe and a phone with no battery in it is impossible to locate.

But even the simplest phones, available for $0.00 with a 2 year term, have GPS now.

[FiReSTaRT]

But even the simplest phones, available for $0.00 with a 2 year term, have GPS now.

That's the thing.. If you bought it outright, it would still cost you a couple of c-notes. You can buy some lower-end phones for a lot less and they come without a GPS chip, Even smartphones can be flashed with firmware that will give the user more control over the GPS chipset (as in the certainty of it being off unless asked for by the customer).

[Rob MacLennan]

That's the thing.. If you bought it outright, it would still cost you a couple of c-notes. You can buy some lower-end phones for a lot less and they come without a GPS chip, Even smartphones can be flashed with firmware that will give the user more control over the GPS chipset (as in the certainty of it being off unless asked for by the customer).

You mean like my little Motorola throw-away, that I top up at Best Buy when I go to The States? Yeah, I get that. Pushing new firmware is beyond the skill level of most users and most people don't realize what they have in their less expensive, 'free with contract' phones. If they did, then these data loggers wouldn't even be on the RADAR.

[viper84737]

You have to be a serious dumbass to not see the future progression of such technology, and that, I believe, is what the OP was talking about. Yeah ok FOR NOW it's harmless, but how easy will it be for this to transition into the next level of surveillance. Why? Because people dismiss the current level as being harmless. All it takes is one little step forward from the previous, with nobody looking ahead two, and you've got yourself trouble. It's happening non-stop around us, and complacent citizens are wholly oblivious to it. At what point does it become a problem to you? The point of no return? I thought so.

You should thank the OP for bringing it to your attention.

[Brian P]

OnStar already exists and is MUCH more intrusive and it DOES transmit data back to home base.

Solution: don't buy a GM vehicle - or if you do, insist on the OnStar being disabled (and try to get out of paying for it).

[mxs]

Do they actually give you a hassle when you request it to have it disabled with a proof?

[Vlad]

But even the simplest phones, available for $0.00 with a 2 year term, have GPS now.

There are plenty of non-GPS phones everywhere, and they are dirt cheap. Verizon in US sells a phone with $10 of air time for $15 and 7-11 in Canada is not far off. Neither have a GPS.

BTW, those that fall for 2 year terms need to be tracked so they can sell them a bridge next time.