3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Jeezzz - this thread brought out the fruitcakes !!!

Takes one to know one.

1 hour ago, johng said:

The right to privacy ? amazing you don't realise this or even seem to care.

Anyway I'm sure you'll love the pay per mile and lower insurance premiums that will follow with this intrusive surveillance model along with the instant fines for any traffic violations even minor ones.

They call it 'big brother' for a reason he knows better than you you are the subordinate who must obey.

Go and watch the classic move Demolition Man for a slight clue.

Or Enemy of the People.

On 4/15/2026 at 4:31 PM, pedro01 said:

If someone wants to listen to me saying:

• <deleted> spastic

• Knob jokey

• <deleted>

• cum bubble

• Blind bastard

They are more than welcome - but I don't think there's value in it

Indeed, you shouldn’t be reading Johng’s comments in the car anyway !! 🤣

11 hours ago, johng said:

The right to privacy ? amazing you don't realise this or even seem to care.

Anyway I'm sure you'll love the pay per mile and lower insurance premiums that will follow with this intrusive surveillance model along with the instant fines for any traffic violations even minor ones.

They call it 'big brother' for a reason he knows better than you you are the subordinate who must obey.

Go and watch the classic move Demolition Man for a slight clue.

All of that is your imagined nonsense.

What privacy have you lost, or which freedoms have been taken away by your car monitoring your driving performance and alerting you when you are showing signs of drowsiness?

Do you have an answer?

Which essential liberty are you giving up by having your car alert you when it detects you're driving like someone who needs a rest?

If only that's all it was doing.

It's also tracking whether you accelerate quickly, or brake excessively, or take sharp corners... And reporting all of that to your insurance company so they can raise your rates, and to the manufacturer so they can deny you warranty coverage. And soon, they'll be reporting your miles driven to the State so they can tax you by the mile and even shut your car down if you exceed your mileage allowance this month. Or fail to pay those taxes.

Slippery slope, giving up privacy like that. Maybe it's not so bad yet. But we're headed that way.

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Do you have an answer?

As I've already said in multiple posts in this thread, I don't want, or except the need for big brother to be "monitoring" my performance in any way shape or form I don't want to live under constant surveillance like a criminal..

These new cars are not just prodding you if you get sleepy at the wheel they use a radar system so they can see everything going on in the car and or have cameras that see everything going on in the car as well as listen to the audio too.

They have GPS tracking and kill switches that the "authorities" can use to stop the car dead

whenever and wherever they want.

They can send data about driving habits to insurance companies and of course the police.

But nothing to see here its 'for your own safety' and 'think of the children'

Soon they wont even allow the ownership of a vehicle you'll have to use your phone to order a robotaxi which reminds me of another classic movie.......

"Hasta la vista, baby"

18 minutes ago, impulse said:

Slippery slope, giving up privacy like that. Maybe it's not so bad yet. But we're headed that way.

Glad to see at least someone else understands what is creeping up on us all. 👍

Glad to see at least someone else understands what is creeping up on us all. 👍

Wait until people start getting tickets in the mail because their LIDAR detected them following too closely on the interstate yesterday. Or exceeded the speed limit. Or they were holding a cell phone while driving. Or... Or...

It's not happening yet. But the key word is "yet".

1 hour ago, impulse said:

But the key word is "yet".

Agreed, as soon as they can do it they will.

In other news Instagram has quietly removed the ability to send end to end encrypted messages, it was only when an eagle eyed 'conspiracy theorist' read the updated terms and conditions and questioned them did they admit to it with the lame excuse that it (encryption) was hardly ever used. 🤔

Agreed, as soon as they can do it they will.

In other news Instagram has quietly removed the ability to send end to end encrypted messages, it was only when an eagle eyed 'conspiracy theorist' read the updated terms and conditions and questioned them did they admit to it with the lame excuse that it (encryption) was hardly ever used.

Slightly off topic but in a similar vein, look at the pushback against FLOCK cameras around the USA. They collect information from license plates... If you're driving, they know where you've been, where you stopped... All stuff that used to be private. No more. Now it's all for sale.

It seems that the Canadian trucker protests taught some of us nothing.

Edited May 9May 9 by impulse

They have GPS tracking and kill switches that the "authorities" can use to stop the car dead

whenever and wherever they want.

It's not just the authorities. Miss a car payment and the loan company can shut your car down, too. Fair play, as long as nobody makes a mistake when you're a woman all alone in the bad part of town.

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

when you're a woman all alone in the bad part of town.

I'd wager a guess that most of those in favour of this dystopian nightmare still don't know 'what is a women' 😋

Let's run another little scenario with your SMART car.

You've driven downtown, walked half a block in which you were watched by three municipal cameras and several private CCTVs.

In the shop, there are multiple CCTVs, too. You've paid, gone back to your car, meanwhile, a police database has misidentified you by facial recognition.

Suddenly, your house is raided and searched, your licence plate flagged. Your car, SMARTer than you, connected to "the system" stops dead, and locks your doors, waiting to deliver you to authorities.

All because you were misidentified. You'll probably have 20 years to think about it.

All because these systems are connected and the systems make the immediate decisions, not people.

Do yourself a favour--buy a beater.

3 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Let's run another little scenario with your SMART car.

You've driven downtown, walked half a block in which you were watched by three municipal cameras and several private CCTVs.

In the shop, there are multiple CCTVs, too. You've paid, gone back to your car, meanwhile, a police database has misidentified you by facial recognition.

Suddenly, your house is raided and searched, your licence plate flagged. Your car, SMARTer than you, connected to "the system" stops dead, and locks your doors, waiting to deliver you to authorities.

All because you were misidentified. You'll probably have 20 years to think about it.

All because these systems are connected and the systems make the immediate decisions, not people.

Do yourself a favour--buy a beater.

Won't your COVID mask defeat all that technology?

How long before cars go the same way as tractors and agricultural equipment whereby one must use OEM parts and the dealer network for repairs?

Third party mechanics and generic parts not allowed.

44 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

How long before cars go the same way

Already there I think extremely difficult and costly to fix new cars with all the high tech electronics.

8 hours ago, impulse said:

If only that's all it was doing.

It's also tracking whether you accelerate quickly, or brake excessively, or take sharp corners... And reporting all of that to your insurance company so they can raise your rates, and to the manufacturer so they can deny you warranty coverage. And soon, they'll be reporting your miles driven to the State so they can tax you by the mile and even shut your car down if you exceed your mileage allowance this month. Or fail to pay those taxes.

Slippery slope, giving up privacy like that. Maybe it's not so bad yet. But we're headed that way.

That argument falls apart pretty quickly when you apply the same logic consistently.

If manufacturers and insurers truly wanted total surveillance, they already have the perfect device for it - your smartphone. It tracks location, speed, acceleration, braking patterns, routes, dwell times, and even whether you're using it while driving.

Yet somehow the same people screaming about “the car spying on me” happily carry a GPS tracker in their pocket 24/7.

So unless when taking their 1970's Datsun Sunny out for a ride the tinfoil-hat brigade are also leaving their phones at home, paying cash everywhere, avoiding toll roads, CCTV, licence-plate recognition cameras, Google Maps, Apple Maps, and mobile towers… the outrage about connected cars is rather selective.

And the “they’ll shut your car down if you exceed your mileage allowance” stuff is pure slippery-slope fantasy. Usage-based insurance has existed for years. Black-box systems simply reward safer drivers with lower premiums. If someone constantly launches from traffic lights, brakes aggressively, and corners like they’re in a rally stage, why shouldn’t insurers price that risk differently? Insurance has always been about measuring risk.

Same with distance-based road tax. Frankly, taxing by kilometres driven is one of the fairest systems possible. Why should a retiree driving 3,000 km a year subsidise someone commuting 20,000 km annually and putting far more wear on roads?

“User pays” is hardly some dystopian concept - it’s basic fairness. The UK and several other countries are already exploring this as fuel-tax revenue disappears with EV adoption.

People also forget that modern cars record data mainly because modern cars are incredibly complex machines. Telemetry helps diagnose faults, improve safety systems, investigate crashes, and reduce fraud. When airbags deploy, ABS activates, or a drivetrain fault appears, that data is useful. It’s not some conspiracy.

Could privacy protections be improved? Absolutely. Consumers should know what data is collected and have meaningful opt-outs where practical. But jumping from “cars collect telemetry” to “government kill-switches and mileage rationing” is Hollywood-level paranoia - proper flat-earther-moon-landing-denier conspiracy lunacy.

That argument falls apart pretty quickly when you apply the same logic consistently.

If manufacturers and insurers truly wanted total surveillance, they already have the perfect device for it - your smartphone. It tracks location, speed, acceleration, braking patterns, routes, dwell times, and even whether you're using it while driving.

Yet somehow the same people screaming about “the car spying on me” happily carry a GPS tracker in their pocket 24/7.

So unless when taking their 1970's Datsun Sunny out for a ride the tinfoil-hat brigade are also leaving their phones at home, paying cash everywhere, avoiding toll roads, CCTV, licence-plate recognition cameras, Google Maps, Apple Maps, and mobile towers… the outrage about connected cars is rather selective.

And the “they’ll shut your car down if you exceed your mileage allowance” stuff is pure slippery-slope fantasy. Usage-based insurance has existed for years. Black-box systems simply reward safer drivers with lower premiums. If someone constantly launches from traffic lights, brakes aggressively, and corners like they’re in a rally stage, why shouldn’t insurers price that risk differently? Insurance has always been about measuring risk.

Same with distance-based road tax. Frankly, taxing by kilometres driven is one of the fairest systems possible. Why should a retiree driving 3,000 km a year subsidise someone commuting 20,000 km annually and putting far more wear on roads?

“User pays” is hardly some dystopian concept - it’s basic fairness. The UK and several other countries are already exploring this as fuel-tax revenue disappears with EV adoption.

People also forget that modern cars record data mainly because modern cars are incredibly complex machines. Telemetry helps diagnose faults, improve safety systems, investigate crashes, and reduce fraud. When airbags deploy, ABS activates, or a drivetrain fault appears, that data is useful. It’s not some conspiracy.

Could privacy protections be improved? Absolutely. Consumers should know what data is collected and have meaningful opt-outs where practical. But jumping from “cars collect telemetry” to “government kill-switches and mileage rationing” is Hollywood-level paranoia - proper flat-earther-moon-landing-denier conspiracy lunacy.

2 words and most of my reservations go away. Smartphone or car...

Informed consent.

Your diatribe about smartphones shows that the dystopian future isn't just the stuff of Hollywood. It's already happening. 20 years ago, did you ever foresee the day the government could lock down your bank account if you protested a healthcare mandate? Or chase you down to California following your cell phone signal because you protested at the Capitol?

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

they already have the perfect device for it - your smartphone

Yes indeed the almost perfect surveillance device.

14 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Could privacy protections be improved? Absolutely. Consumers should know what data is collected and have meaningful opt-outs where practical. But jumping from “cars collect telemetry” to “government kill-switches and mileage rationing” is Hollywood-level paranoia - proper flat-earther-moon-landing-denier conspiracy lunacy.

Haha you really are the perfect agenda 2030 WEF own nothing and be happy candidate/shill

"I was one of the people forced to take the vaccine. Forced into the tests. At one point I had the cleanest sinuses on the planet - they pushed that swab so far up my nose it drew tears. I spent nearly half of 2020 isolated from family, and another >10% of 2021 in quarantine, was kept from my family for over five months, and the Covid era cost me a good job. I'm not theorising about coercion from a comfortable chair - I lived it."

And you would do it all again, 🤮 what the heck is wrong with you ???

2 hours ago, johng said:

And you would do it all again, 🤮 what the heck is wrong with you ???

Nothing - perfectly healthy - even after taking those vaccines you convinced yourself were so deadly.

& Fortunately my children will be safer on the roads too - not having to worry about delusional paranoid stoners who want their freedom to drive like idiots consequence free.

This Orwellian dystopian paranoia is comical.

2 hours ago, impulse said:

2 words and most of my reservations go away. Smartphone or car...

Informed consent.

Your diatribe about smartphones shows that the dystopian future isn't just the stuff of Hollywood. It's already happening. 20 years ago, did you ever foresee the day the government could lock down your bank account if you protested a healthcare mandate? Or chase you down to California following your cell phone signal because you protested at the Capitol?

“Informed consent” is fair. But you’ve jumped straight into worst-case political scenarios.

20 years ago people also didn’t foresee carrying a device that could instantly navigate anywhere on Earth, summon emergency help, translate languages, video call family across the world, replace cameras, maps, wallets, tickets, encyclopaedias, music players, and computers - yet here we are.

You’re focusing entirely on hypothetical abuse while ignoring the overwhelming net benefit connected technology has brought to humanity.

And the examples you gave aren’t evidence that smartphones or connected cars are “evil” - they’re evidence that digital evidence exists in a connected society. The same technology that can place a criminal at a riot can also exonerate innocent people, locate missing children, call ambulances after crashes, and help solve real crimes.

That’s not dystopian. That’s just modern civilisation.

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

That argument falls apart pretty quickly when you apply the same logic consistently.

If manufacturers and insurers truly wanted total surveillance, they already have the perfect device for it - your smartphone. It tracks location, speed, acceleration, braking patterns, routes, dwell times, and even whether you're using it while driving.

Yet somehow the same people screaming about “the car spying on me” happily carry a GPS tracker in their pocket 24/7.

So unless when taking their 1970's Datsun Sunny out for a ride the tinfoil-hat brigade are also leaving their phones at home, paying cash everywhere, avoiding toll roads, CCTV, licence-plate recognition cameras, Google Maps, Apple Maps, and mobile towers… the outrage about connected cars is rather selective.

And the “they’ll shut your car down if you exceed your mileage allowance” stuff is pure slippery-slope fantasy. Usage-based insurance has existed for years. Black-box systems simply reward safer drivers with lower premiums. If someone constantly launches from traffic lights, brakes aggressively, and corners like they’re in a rally stage, why shouldn’t insurers price that risk differently? Insurance has always been about measuring risk.

Same with distance-based road tax. Frankly, taxing by kilometres driven is one of the fairest systems possible. Why should a retiree driving 3,000 km a year subsidise someone commuting 20,000 km annually and putting far more wear on roads?

“User pays” is hardly some dystopian concept - it’s basic fairness. The UK and several other countries are already exploring this as fuel-tax revenue disappears with EV adoption.

People also forget that modern cars record data mainly because modern cars are incredibly complex machines. Telemetry helps diagnose faults, improve safety systems, investigate crashes, and reduce fraud. When airbags deploy, ABS activates, or a drivetrain fault appears, that data is useful. It’s not some conspiracy.

Could privacy protections be improved? Absolutely. Consumers should know what data is collected and have meaningful opt-outs where practical. But jumping from “cars collect telemetry” to “government kill-switches and mileage rationing” is Hollywood-level paranoia - proper flat-earther-moon-landing-denier conspiracy lunacy.

I liked having a car with a cellular modem. It allowed me to lock my doors remotely and find my car in the airport parking lot.

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Same with distance-based road tax. Frankly, taxing by kilometres driven is one of the fairest systems possible. Why should a retiree driving 3,000 km a year subsidise someone commuting 20,000 km annually and putting far more wear on roads?

The same goal can be accomplished with less overhead via a gas tax. The more you drive, the more you pay.

54 minutes ago, TedG said:

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Same with distance-based road tax. Frankly, taxing by kilometres driven is one of the fairest systems possible. Why should a retiree driving 3,000 km a year subsidise someone commuting 20,000 km annually and putting far more wear on roads?

The same goal can be accomplished with less overhead via a gas tax. The more you drive, the more you pay.

In principle yes - until you factor in EV's.

1 hour ago, TedG said:

I liked having a car with a cellular modem. It allowed me to lock my doors remotely and find my car in the airport parking lot.

Yup - absolutely awesome. Remote AC when it’s boiling outside, remote heating when it’s freezing, diagnostics on your phone, theft tracking, emergency crash alerts… modern tech has made cars objectively better.

There will always be Orwellian-minded luddites who treat every technological advance as the first step toward tyranny.

When credit cards appeared, people warned governments would track every purchase. When mobile phones appeared, they warned nobody would have privacy anymore. When CCTV arrived, they claimed society was becoming a police state.

Yet society overwhelmingly embraced all of it because the practical benefits were enormous.

Connected cars are just the latest version of the same cycle: fear first (by the luddites), adoption second, normality third.