speed camera obsession

[The Selfish Gene]

you're incorrect SingleC - I make it funny as it is funny, but it's definitely going to happen.

What makes you think it won't? What part of my post isn't accurate?

[singlecoil]

The Selfish Gene said:

...What makes you think it won't? What part of my post isn't accurate?

This bit

The Selfish Gene said:

provide the same tax revenue and take away more human rights.

Speeding fines are not taxes, they are penalties, and as for the human rights point, I'm not going to dignify that with a response.

[The Selfish Gene]

singlecoil said:

The Selfish Gene said:

...What makes you think it won't? What part of my post isn't accurate?

This bit

The Selfish Gene said:

provide the same tax revenue and take away more human rights.

Speeding fines are not taxes, they are penalties, and as for the human rights point, I'm not going to dignify that with a response.

ah I see - well I don't agree, they are tax, they are also a penalty in the same way I could penalise people for wearing white socks. Many people do it, and they'd be an easy target.

You don't think it's a right to be allowed to drive freely without being controlled to a draconian level?

I agree it shouldn't be, it should be a privilege to drive at all. Alas whilst we let any old retard behind the wheel it is actually currently a right, and thus having that right curtailed is unacceptable.

[Crackie]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

The Selfish Gene said:

WJNB said:

We 'ain't seen nothing.
More & more use the roads because the rail network is crumbling as is other forms of public transport.
We continue to be over-populated.
Satellites will soon monitor EVERY vehicle for speeding, dangerous driving & parking offences. It will be the BIG BROTHER that generations have feared.
If your 60 years+ you will have enjoyed the best of motoring even if it was in humble vehicles.. God help you if you're younger & hope to travel.

are you assuming (satellite comment) that every vehicle will be fitted with a tracker?

Not sure I'd go quite as far as WJNB in the near future but it's pretty clear which way the wind's blowing and personally I think the assertion we'll be watched more and more by Big Brother is almost certainly correct. Of course there will always be those who say if you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to fear but the danger is you end-up with state control for the sake of it and that's not a desirable place to be IMO....

Who do you think is going to be doing all this watching, and why would they want to? Despite what you might think, people really aren't all that interesting.

You're assuming a person or people will be watching; no human is needed.

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

The Selfish Gene said:

WJNB said:

We 'ain't seen nothing.
More & more use the roads because the rail network is crumbling as is other forms of public transport.
We continue to be over-populated.
Satellites will soon monitor EVERY vehicle for speeding, dangerous driving & parking offences. It will be the BIG BROTHER that generations have feared.
If your 60 years+ you will have enjoyed the best of motoring even if it was in humble vehicles.. God help you if you're younger & hope to travel.

are you assuming (satellite comment) that every vehicle will be fitted with a tracker?

Not sure I'd go quite as far as WJNB in the near future but it's pretty clear which way the wind's blowing and personally I think the assertion we'll be watched more and more by Big Brother is almost certainly correct. Of course there will always be those who say if you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to fear but the danger is you end-up with state control for the sake of it and that's not a desirable place to be IMO....

Who do you think is going to be doing all this watching, and why would they want to? Despite what you might think, people really aren't all that interesting.

We've already got a lot more watching of what happens on our roads courtesy of technology than we had (say) 10 years ago and my guess is that will only become more the case in future; you think otherwise?

I'm sure you realise you didn't answer my question.

The suggestion from WJNB was that increasing surveillance on our roads via technology was likely and given the trend over the last 10 years I said I tended to agree (although in the short-term perhaps not to the extent WJNB outlined). Do you also concur or do you think something is likely to happen to stop or reverse that trend (and if so what?).

Alternatively, given your question, do you believe no such trend exists and refute the idea our movements around the road network are being monitored and watched already via things like cameras?

[singlecoil]

The Selfish Gene said:

singlecoil said:

The Selfish Gene said:

...What makes you think it won't? What part of my post isn't accurate?

This bit

The Selfish Gene said:

provide the same tax revenue and take away more human rights.

Speeding fines are not taxes, they are penalties, and as for the human rights point, I'm not going to dignify that with a response.

ah I see - well I don't agree, they are tax, they are also a penalty in the same way I could penalise people for wearing white socks. Many people do it, and they'd be an easy target.

If there was a negative element to wearing white socks which could affect other people then penalising those that continued to do so would be entirely reasonable.

The Selfish Gene said:

You don't think it's a right to be allowed to drive freely without being controlled to a draconian level?

I don't accept the premise of your question

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

The suggestion from WJNB was that increasing surveillance on our roads via technology was likely and given the trend over the last 10 years I said I tended to agree (although in the short-term perhaps not to the extent WJNB outlined). Do you also concur or do you think something is likely to happen to stop or reverse that trend (and if so what?).

Alternatively, given your question, do you believe no such trend exists and refute the idea our movements around the road network are being monitored and watched already via things like cameras?

You've still made no attempt to answer my question. That being the case there is no point in answering yours.

[The Selfish Gene]

SingleC - have you ever seen a man wearing white socks with a suit or jeans! It's a very negative thing!!

[singlecoil]

The Selfish Gene said:

SingleC - have you ever seen a man wearing white socks with a suit or jeans! It's a very negative thing!!

Make up your mind, do you want to discuss this seriously or not?

[TooMany2cvs]

Dave Finney said:

The Selfish Gene said:

WJNB said:

... Satellites will soon monitor EVERY vehicle ...

are you assuming (satellite comment) that every vehicle will be fitted with a tracker?

Every new vehicle must have a tracker and microphone fitted along with a data link to the authorities. It's called Ecall:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/2...

Except that isn't "a tracker".

All the requirement is for is calling GPS location to the emergency services, and giving a location/vehicle description/direction of travel when either the button's pressed or the airbags go off, with . Full stop. End of. No more.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTM...

https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2011...

The requirement explicitly says...

eCall definition said:

Article 6 - Rules on privacy and data protection
...
2. The personal data processed pursuant to this Regulation shall only be used for the purpose of handling the emergency situations referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 5(2).

3. The personal data processed pursuant to this Regulation shall not be retained longer than necessary for the purpose of handling the emergency situations referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 5(2). Those data shall be fully deleted as soon as they are no longer necessary for that purpose.

4. Manufacturers shall ensure that the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system is not traceable and is not subject to any constant tracking.

5. Manufacturers shall ensure that, in the internal memory of the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system, data are automatically and continuously removed. Only the retention of the last three locations of the vehicle shall be permitted in so far as it is strictly necessary to specify the current location and the direction of travel at the time of the event.

6. Those data shall not be available outside the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system to any entities before the eCall is triggered.

7. Privacy enhancing technologies shall be embedded in the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system in order to provide eCall users with the appropriate level of privacy protection, as well as the necessary safeguards to prevent surveillance and misuse.

8. The MSD sent by the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system shall include only the minimum information as referred to in the standard EN 15722:2011 ‘Intelligent transport systems — eSafety — eCall minimum set of data (MSD)’. No additional data shall be transmitted by the 112-based eCall in-vehicle system. That MSD shall be stored in such a way as to make its full and permanent deletion possible.
...

So, no, eCall is explicitly and by design not any kind of road-pricing or road-policing tracker in any way, shape or form.

And it doesn't even need to be fitted to ALL new cars, let alone retro-fitted to pre-existing ones.

[The Selfish Gene]

singlecoil said:

The Selfish Gene said:

SingleC - have you ever seen a man wearing white socks with a suit or jeans! It's a very negative thing!!

Make up your mind, do you want to discuss this seriously or not?

come on SingleC - don't take it all so seriously.

Stand by the points though !

[singlecoil]

The Selfish Gene said:

Stand by the points though !

And as soon as anyone takes you up on them you turn them in to jokes. I can see that you don't have a viable alternative though so it's understandable.

[The Selfish Gene]

singlecoil said:

The Selfish Gene said:

Stand by the points though !

And as soon as anyone takes you up on them you turn them in to jokes. I can see that you don't have a viable alternative though so it's understandable.

bks - you are such a bore.

Come on then - you haven't given any arguments back. Don't rush though - off to the pub to have some fun.

[Dave Finney]

TooMany2cvs said:

Dave Finney said:

The Selfish Gene said:

WJNB said:

... Satellites will soon monitor EVERY vehicle ...

are you assuming (satellite comment) that every vehicle will be fitted with a tracker?

Every new vehicle must have a tracker and microphone fitted along with a data link to the authorities. It's called Ecall:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/2...

Except that isn't "a tracker".

eCall is:
1) a gps location device
2) a microphone
3) a data link to the authorities
4) a requirement for all new cars.

Those appear to be the facts therefore eCall is definitely "a tracker".

The EU promise not to use eCall for other purposes but I don't see how we could verify that, we have to take it on trust.

[singlecoil]

Dave Finney said:

The EU promise not to use eCall for other purposes but I don't see how we could verify that, we have to take it on trust.

Thinking of governments as somehow separate from us is a victim mentality thing.

[TooMany2cvs]

Dave Finney said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Dave Finney said:

The Selfish Gene said:

WJNB said:

... Satellites will soon monitor EVERY vehicle ...

are you assuming (satellite comment) that every vehicle will be fitted with a tracker?

Every new vehicle must have a tracker and microphone fitted along with a data link to the authorities. It's called Ecall:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/2...

Except that isn't "a tracker".

eCall is:
1) a gps location device
2) a microphone
3) a data link to the authorities
4) a requirement for all new cars.

Those appear to be the facts therefore eCall is definitely "a tracker".

The EU promise not to use eCall for other purposes but I don't see how we could verify that, we have to take it on trust.

Now read all what you snipped. Including the bit saying manufacturers simply cannot make it do the things you're claiming it mandates.

[IJWS15]

Threads like this are always amusing.

If there weren't so may pratts driving around so far above the limit there would be no speed cameras as there would be no revenue. Turkeys voting for Xmas springs to mind.

Still - it is a voluntary tax and I am all for those.

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

The suggestion from WJNB was that increasing surveillance on our roads via technology was likely and given the trend over the last 10 years I said I tended to agree (although in the short-term perhaps not to the extent WJNB outlined). Do you also concur or do you think something is likely to happen to stop or reverse that trend (and if so what?).

Alternatively, given your question, do you believe no such trend exists and refute the idea our movements around the road network are being monitored and watched already via things like cameras?

You've still made no attempt to answer my question. That being the case there is no point in answering yours.

We are being watched already - witness all those "safety" cameras around the road network - and as I see it the people who will be watching more extensively in future are likely to be the same or similar groups as those doing it now. I'm pretty sure you know who they are but in the (highly unlikely) event you don't Google is your friend!

[singlecoil]

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

The suggestion from WJNB was that increasing surveillance on our roads via technology was likely and given the trend over the last 10 years I said I tended to agree (although in the short-term perhaps not to the extent WJNB outlined). Do you also concur or do you think something is likely to happen to stop or reverse that trend (and if so what?).

Alternatively, given your question, do you believe no such trend exists and refute the idea our movements around the road network are being monitored and watched already via things like cameras?

You've still made no attempt to answer my question. That being the case there is no point in answering yours.

We are being watched already - witness all those "safety" cameras around the road network - and as I see it the people who will be watching more extensively in future are likely to be the same or similar groups as those doing it now. I'm pretty sure you know who they are but in the (highly unlikely) event you don't Google is your friend!

I'll remind you of my question

singlecoil said:

Who do you think is going to be doing all this watching, and why would they want to? Despite what you might think, people really aren't all that interesting.

[JNW1]

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

singlecoil said:

JNW1 said:

The suggestion from WJNB was that increasing surveillance on our roads via technology was likely and given the trend over the last 10 years I said I tended to agree (although in the short-term perhaps not to the extent WJNB outlined). Do you also concur or do you think something is likely to happen to stop or reverse that trend (and if so what?).

Alternatively, given your question, do you believe no such trend exists and refute the idea our movements around the road network are being monitored and watched already via things like cameras?

You've still made no attempt to answer my question. That being the case there is no point in answering yours.

We are being watched already - witness all those "safety" cameras around the road network - and as I see it the people who will be watching more extensively in future are likely to be the same or similar groups as those doing it now. I'm pretty sure you know who they are but in the (highly unlikely) event you don't Google is your friend!

I'll remind you of my question

singlecoil said:

Who do you think is going to be doing all this watching, and why would they want to? Despite what you might think, people really aren't all that interesting.

I know what your question was and I'll repeat the answer I just gave; we are being watched already and the people who (IMO) will watch us to an even greater degree in future are the same as those who are watching us now. They obviously think we're worth taking an interest in as otherwise they presumably wouldn't have bothered with all those static cameras, camera vans, etc.....