Major contribuition to road safety and reducing aggressive driving.

[L00b]

So the EU has decided that every car should now be manufactured with a (user-selectable, I read?) speed limiter feature?

 

Big deal : it's been a common feature of very many cars at all levels of price and trim, particularly those with cruise control (manual or auto) for well over a decade.

 

My Mum's C3 (manual, diesel, no cruise) of 2009 or 2010 has it built-in as standard. Same with our 2008 C class, and my Dad's 2012 C5. Our 2008 V50 had it, an'all. In fact the only car I can think of right now that doesn't have it, is our 21 year-old MX5!

 

But well, without bothering with the past 8 pages, let me guess: oooooh, aaaaah, big bad EU taking our rights and our sovereignty and all that again?

[Cyclone]

13 hours ago, RollingJ said:

You clearly want the last word, so I'll let you have it - except to say that public transport has to take the route where it serves it's customers.

I think you're wrong, it's nothing to do with wanting the last word, I thought this was a discussion forum where opinions could be challenged and discussed, did you think it was something different?

1 hour ago, DT Ralge said:

I’m not arguing with you on your point that  speed is perhaps over-played and that there are many other factors and driver lapses/errors/violations that are worthy of analysis in any discussion on road safety. 

 

But the site you reference takes a rather simplistic approach to the stats and I wouldn’t offer their analysis as fact or gospel (lies, damn lies and statistics ...)

 

- they talk about “accidents” and “causes”.

 

As for “accidents”, the stats (we only have data collected and reported on in the Police’s Stats 19 form.) do not give the whole picture on “accidents”.  The Police do not attend every accident/incident/collision, clearly, or even every injury collision (serious or otherwise - there’s a reasonably clear definition of “serious injury”).  So there’s a huge gap from reality that’s not covered by official stats. 

The death stats are pretty accurate, though, we have to assume.  It’s interesting that this site talk “accidents”, not level of injury or death. 

As for “causes”, I’m not sure how the site determines causes. Their presentation of the stats may be using “primary contributory factor” noted on the Stats19 form - in any incident reported on this form, the Police can mark up to 6 contributory factors (primary, secondary ..)

Once again, simplistic in its portrayal of the “facts”.

 

It's the only data we have though, so simplistic as it may be, it's better than just guessing.

58 minutes ago, L00b said:

So the EU has decided that every car should now be manufactured with a (user-selectable, I read?) speed limiter feature?

 

Big deal : it's been a common feature of very many cars at all levels of price and trim, particularly those with cruise control (manual or auto) for well over a decade.

 

My Mum's C3 (manual, diesel, no cruise) of 2009 or 2010 has it built-in as standard. Same with our 2008 C class, and my Dad's 2012 C5. Our 2008 V50 had it, an'all. In fact the only car I can think of right now that doesn't have it, is our 21 year-old MX5!

 

But well, without bothering with the past 8 pages, let me guess: oooooh, aaaaah, big bad EU taking our rights and our sovereignty and all that again?

Slightly more than that isn't it.  My ASL doesn't turn on when I start the car and it can't tell what the speed limit for the road is.  That's the proposal for the new device, it will automatically speed limit to the correct limit and be on by default (but easy to turn off).

[Obelix]

4 hours ago, L00b said:

So the EU has decided that every car should now be manufactured with a (user-selectable, I read?) speed limiter feature?

 

Big deal : it's been a common feature of very many cars at all levels of price and trim, particularly those with cruise control (manual or auto) for well over a decade.

 

My Mum's C3 (manual, diesel, no cruise) of 2009 or 2010 has it built-in as standard. Same with our 2008 C class, and my Dad's 2012 C5. Our 2008 V50 had it, an'all. In fact the only car I can think of right now that doesn't have it, is our 21 year-old MX5!

 

But well, without bothering with the past 8 pages, let me guess: oooooh, aaaaah, big bad EU taking our rights and our sovereignty and all that again?

I think the main objection is how it goes about doing it. It'll be a GPS receiver against a database. How long before someone decides to monetise that and sell the tracking data...? BMW et al already decided that in a car I own, generating data that data is theirs to sell on and make money from? This will be no different and highly intrusive into the bargain.

 

The speed limiting part of it is a minor secondary annoyance to the real data crap fest that will happen.

[L00b]

13 minutes ago, Obelix said:

I think the main objection is how it goes about doing it. It'll be a GPS receiver against a database. How long before someone decides to monetise that and sell the tracking data...? BMW et al already decided that in a car I own, generating data that data is theirs to sell on and make money from? This will be no different and highly intrusive into the bargain.

 

The speed limiting part of it is a minor secondary annoyance to the real data crap fest that will happen.

Nothing that insurances using snitch/telematics black boxes with young drivers haven't already been doing for years, tbh.

 

Re. BMW (and others), doesn't really matter, so long as the mobility data cannot be associated with you personally, and the GDPR is there to ensure that any such association isn't done without your knowledge nor consent.

Edited April 2, 2019 by L00b

[Obelix]

41 minutes ago, L00b said:

Nothing that insurances using snitch/telematics black boxes with young drivers haven't already been doing for years, tbh.

 

Re. BMW (and others), doesn't really matter, so long as the mobility data cannot be associated with you personally, and the GDPR is there to ensure that any such association isn't done without your knowledge nor consent.

Well I can choose not to have a snitch box from my insurers. With these devices I wouldn't be able to.

As for the others, I'd rather not have to rely on the GDPR and it does matter greatly to me at least - if I'm taking my car to be serviced and they sell on the data, I want that sales fee thanks it's my data not theirs to sell.

[geared]

1 hour ago, Obelix said:

BMW et al already decided that in a car I own, generating data that data is theirs to sell on and make money from? This will be no different and highly intrusive into the bargain.

 

The speed limiting part of it is a minor secondary annoyance to the real data crap fest that will happen.

What data do BMW collect off your car at the moment?  or were you talking about future data that could be generated.

 

I wonder if anyone has tested the issue of data ownership in court??  

[Obelix]

They dont tell you...

 

The answer was they needed it for a little while to upload the computers to Munich as it had more in that would fit on the keyfob. When asked they said all the telematics goes back to Munich, at which point I required them to stop all the work and give me the car back. They refused as they said it was "their data" so I removed the car from their workshop myself.

[alchresearch]

The more tech you put in a car, the more there is to go wrong. Today:
 

You could make Tesla's Autopilot swerve into traffic with a few stickers on the road

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/04/02/tencent_tesla_hacking/

[L00b]

4 hours ago, Obelix said:

All true.

 

But then the €s they (might) make on the data, should help keep the cars cheap(-er than they would be without the revenue stream), besides better-designed and more reliable.

 

I see the private life angle/risk of course, and would rather the issue of mobility data be resolved through a co-ownership model (if the car's not being driven, then there is no data, so it's in the big data collector's interest to incentivise the user). But a lot of it is still surmising at this stage.

 

There will come a time in the not-distant-future, wherein socio-economic "progress" like this, hand in hand with still more nannyism and other assorted traffic-curbing measures (participative & coercive alike) will simply make it uneconomic to design and manufacture high-performance cars, never mind to buy and run them.

 

So, better mitigate, and get hold of a decent classic (or eventually-to-be-classic) now. All things (finally) going well, picking up my new, resolutely un-PC car Thursday night, that will give Justin on here nightmares: 340 horses, every last one to the rear axle...and no EU-spec speed limiter 

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by L00b

[DT Ralge]

14 hours ago, Cyclone said:

I think you're wrong, it's nothing to do with wanting the last word, I thought this was a discussion forum where opinions could be challenged and discussed, did you think it was something different?

It's the only data we have though, so simplistic as it may be, it's better than just guessing.

Slightly more than that isn't it.  My ASL doesn't turn on when I start the car and it can't tell what the speed limit for the road is.  That's the proposal for the new device, it will automatically speed limit to the correct limit and be on by default (but easy to turn off).

When they use terminology (“causes”) that does not come from the Stats19 form and then offer a simplistic analysis of what is a massively complex set of data based on a set of contributory factors for every single crash in the Stats19 reporting database, I allow myself doubt and concern, in particular, about their agenda behind their drawing up of their conclusions.