Toyota blocks access to 'black box' data
in [Toyota Prius]
|
Prev: Drivers report trouble with fixed Toyotas
Next: Toyota Provided No Evidence of Testing Electronic Throttle to US Congress
From: dsi1 on 5 Mar 2010 17:22 On 3/5/2010 11:57 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message > news:dpekn.4274$3D3.1562(a)newsfe19.iad... >> On 3/5/2010 10:21 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> >>> >>> When MSoft or Apple develope products that can kill me while you are >>> using >>> them, then we can discuss whether the codesets they use should be >>> proprietary or not. Right now, automakers are producing products that can >>> kill you if used the way they are intended, and they are hiding behind >>> the >>> idea that the data stored is their data or your data. >>> >>> Soon or later is the problem. It should be sooner rather than later. >>> >> >> It will happen sooner than later so consider your wish granted. There's no >> doubt in my mind that the government will mandate that all cars shall have >> this electronic monitoring using the rational that this product can kill >> you as justification. Just remember that you asked for it. >> >> The truth is that soon, many consumer products will be recording our >> behaviors and I don't much care for that. Even hearing aid are recording >> data these days. That's modern life for you. :-) >> > > I'm not arguing that there should or should not be data. I'm arguing that if > there IS data, it's mine not the automakers'. > > I'm not here to call for Big Brother to hide under the back seat of my car. > I'm here to say that if there is a window to what my car is doing AND that > window is already in my car, then I should be allowed to pry the window open > to see through it. The window ought not be locked shut in the name of > protecting the automaker. Indeed, if there is anybody in the equation that > needs to be protected, it's you and I not the automaker. > My guess is that in most cases, this data will be used against the driver because, in most cases, it's driver error that causes most accidents not a malfunctioning of the car therefore, making this information available will not be in the best interest of the consumer. Not to worry though - you're get what you wish for soon enough.
From: Jeff Strickland on 5 Mar 2010 17:35 "dsi1" <dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message news:mufkn.69282$Ye4.2974(a)newsfe11.iad... > On 3/5/2010 11:57 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message >> news:dpekn.4274$3D3.1562(a)newsfe19.iad... >>> On 3/5/2010 10:21 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> When MSoft or Apple develope products that can kill me while you are >>>> using >>>> them, then we can discuss whether the codesets they use should be >>>> proprietary or not. Right now, automakers are producing products that >>>> can >>>> kill you if used the way they are intended, and they are hiding behind >>>> the >>>> idea that the data stored is their data or your data. >>>> >>>> Soon or later is the problem. It should be sooner rather than later. >>>> >>> >>> It will happen sooner than later so consider your wish granted. There's >>> no >>> doubt in my mind that the government will mandate that all cars shall >>> have >>> this electronic monitoring using the rational that this product can kill >>> you as justification. Just remember that you asked for it. >>> >>> The truth is that soon, many consumer products will be recording our >>> behaviors and I don't much care for that. Even hearing aid are recording >>> data these days. That's modern life for you. :-) >>> >> >> I'm not arguing that there should or should not be data. I'm arguing that >> if >> there IS data, it's mine not the automakers'. >> >> I'm not here to call for Big Brother to hide under the back seat of my >> car. >> I'm here to say that if there is a window to what my car is doing AND >> that >> window is already in my car, then I should be allowed to pry the window >> open >> to see through it. The window ought not be locked shut in the name of >> protecting the automaker. Indeed, if there is anybody in the equation >> that >> needs to be protected, it's you and I not the automaker. >> > > My guess is that in most cases, this data will be used against the driver > because, in most cases, it's driver error that causes most accidents not a > malfunctioning of the car therefore, making this information available > will not be in the best interest of the consumer. Not to worry though - > you're get what you wish for soon enough. > Be that as it is, Toyota is buying off claimants because the data apparently shows that the car was at fault, not the claimant. TODAY, the data is proprietary, and Toyota is keeping the secret and settling out of court because if it faces the plaintiff, the data will show Toyota is culpable.
From: dsi1 on 5 Mar 2010 17:47 On 3/5/2010 12:35 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message > news:mufkn.69282$Ye4.2974(a)newsfe11.iad... >> On 3/5/2010 11:57 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>> "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message >>> news:dpekn.4274$3D3.1562(a)newsfe19.iad... >>>> On 3/5/2010 10:21 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> When MSoft or Apple develope products that can kill me while you are >>>>> using >>>>> them, then we can discuss whether the codesets they use should be >>>>> proprietary or not. Right now, automakers are producing products that >>>>> can >>>>> kill you if used the way they are intended, and they are hiding behind >>>>> the >>>>> idea that the data stored is their data or your data. >>>>> >>>>> Soon or later is the problem. It should be sooner rather than later. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It will happen sooner than later so consider your wish granted. There's >>>> no >>>> doubt in my mind that the government will mandate that all cars shall >>>> have >>>> this electronic monitoring using the rational that this product can kill >>>> you as justification. Just remember that you asked for it. >>>> >>>> The truth is that soon, many consumer products will be recording our >>>> behaviors and I don't much care for that. Even hearing aid are recording >>>> data these days. That's modern life for you. :-) >>>> >>> >>> I'm not arguing that there should or should not be data. I'm arguing that >>> if >>> there IS data, it's mine not the automakers'. >>> >>> I'm not here to call for Big Brother to hide under the back seat of my >>> car. >>> I'm here to say that if there is a window to what my car is doing AND >>> that >>> window is already in my car, then I should be allowed to pry the window >>> open >>> to see through it. The window ought not be locked shut in the name of >>> protecting the automaker. Indeed, if there is anybody in the equation >>> that >>> needs to be protected, it's you and I not the automaker. >>> >> >> My guess is that in most cases, this data will be used against the driver >> because, in most cases, it's driver error that causes most accidents not a >> malfunctioning of the car therefore, making this information available >> will not be in the best interest of the consumer. Not to worry though - >> you're get what you wish for soon enough. >> > > Be that as it is, Toyota is buying off claimants because the data apparently > shows that the car was at fault, not the claimant. > > TODAY, the data is proprietary, and Toyota is keeping the secret and > settling out of court because if it faces the plaintiff, the data will show > Toyota is culpable. > I think it's likely that there is some electronic glitch causing problems with their cars and that Toyota is completely in the dark about how to solve this problem. When this all blows over, we'll be able to give a proper analysis of the situation and in hindsight, what Toyota should have done. Today I'm not going to worry about it. :-)
From: Mark on 5 Mar 2010 19:17 On Mar 5, 5:47 pm, dsi1 <d...(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote: > On 3/5/2010 12:35 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > > > > > "dsi1"<d...(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message > >news:mufkn.69282$Ye4.2974(a)newsfe11.iad... > >> On 3/5/2010 11:57 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > >>> "dsi1"<d...(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message > >>>news:dpekn.4274$3D3.1562(a)newsfe19.iad... > >>>> On 3/5/2010 10:21 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: > > >>>>> When MSoft or Apple develope products that can kill me while you are > >>>>> using > >>>>> them, then we can discuss whether the codesets they use should be > >>>>> proprietary or not. Right now, automakers are producing products that > >>>>> can > >>>>> kill you if used the way they are intended, and they are hiding behind > >>>>> the > >>>>> idea that the data stored is their data or your data. > > >>>>> Soon or later is the problem. It should be sooner rather than later.. > > >>>> It will happen sooner than later so consider your wish granted. There's > >>>> no > >>>> doubt in my mind that the government will mandate that all cars shall > >>>> have > >>>> this electronic monitoring using the rational that this product can kill > >>>> you as justification. Just remember that you asked for it. > > >>>> The truth is that soon, many consumer products will be recording our > >>>> behaviors and I don't much care for that. Even hearing aid are recording > >>>> data these days. That's modern life for you. :-) > > >>> I'm not arguing that there should or should not be data. I'm arguing that > >>> if > >>> there IS data, it's mine not the automakers'. > > >>> I'm not here to call for Big Brother to hide under the back seat of my > >>> car. > >>> I'm here to say that if there is a window to what my car is doing AND > >>> that > >>> window is already in my car, then I should be allowed to pry the window > >>> open > >>> to see through it. The window ought not be locked shut in the name of > >>> protecting the automaker. Indeed, if there is anybody in the equation > >>> that > >>> needs to be protected, it's you and I not the automaker. > > >> My guess is that in most cases, this data will be used against the driver > >> because, in most cases, it's driver error that causes most accidents not a > >> malfunctioning of the car therefore, making this information available > >> will not be in the best interest of the consumer. Not to worry though - > >> you're get what you wish for soon enough. > > > Be that as it is, Toyota is buying off claimants because the data apparently > > shows that the car was at fault, not the claimant. > > > TODAY, the data is proprietary, and Toyota is keeping the secret and > > settling out of court because if it faces the plaintiff, the data will show > > Toyota is culpable. > > I think it's likely that there is some electronic glitch causing > problems with their cars and that Toyota is completely in the dark about > how to solve this problem. When this all blows over, we'll be able to > give a proper analysis of the situation and in hindsight, what Toyota > should have done. Today I'm not going to worry about it. :-) I said it a few weeks ago , I say it again.. Toyota should publish the source code for the throttle control on the Internet for public review. This is the only way to clear the software if there is no problem, and if there is a problem, some hot shot SW guy will find it. Mark
From: Al Falfa on 5 Mar 2010 19:28
"dsi1" <dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message news:hSfkn.3639$jt1.2086(a)newsfe01.iad... > On 3/5/2010 12:35 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >> "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message >> news:mufkn.69282$Ye4.2974(a)newsfe11.iad... >>> On 3/5/2010 11:57 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>>> "dsi1"<dsi1(a)humuhumunukunukuapuapa.org> wrote in message >>>> news:dpekn.4274$3D3.1562(a)newsfe19.iad... >>>>> On 3/5/2010 10:21 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> When MSoft or Apple develope products that can kill me while you are >>>>>> using >>>>>> them, then we can discuss whether the codesets they use should be >>>>>> proprietary or not. Right now, automakers are producing products that >>>>>> can >>>>>> kill you if used the way they are intended, and they are hiding >>>>>> behind >>>>>> the >>>>>> idea that the data stored is their data or your data. >>>>>> >>>>>> Soon or later is the problem. It should be sooner rather than later. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It will happen sooner than later so consider your wish granted. >>>>> There's >>>>> no >>>>> doubt in my mind that the government will mandate that all cars shall >>>>> have >>>>> this electronic monitoring using the rational that this product can >>>>> kill >>>>> you as justification. Just remember that you asked for it. >>>>> >>>>> The truth is that soon, many consumer products will be recording our >>>>> behaviors and I don't much care for that. Even hearing aid are >>>>> recording >>>>> data these days. That's modern life for you. :-) >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not arguing that there should or should not be data. I'm arguing >>>> that >>>> if >>>> there IS data, it's mine not the automakers'. >>>> >>>> I'm not here to call for Big Brother to hide under the back seat of my >>>> car. >>>> I'm here to say that if there is a window to what my car is doing AND >>>> that >>>> window is already in my car, then I should be allowed to pry the window >>>> open >>>> to see through it. The window ought not be locked shut in the name of >>>> protecting the automaker. Indeed, if there is anybody in the equation >>>> that >>>> needs to be protected, it's you and I not the automaker. >>>> >>> >>> My guess is that in most cases, this data will be used against the >>> driver >>> because, in most cases, it's driver error that causes most accidents not >>> a >>> malfunctioning of the car therefore, making this information available >>> will not be in the best interest of the consumer. Not to worry though - >>> you're get what you wish for soon enough. >>> >> >> Be that as it is, Toyota is buying off claimants because the data >> apparently >> shows that the car was at fault, not the claimant. >> >> TODAY, the data is proprietary, and Toyota is keeping the secret and >> settling out of court because if it faces the plaintiff, the data will >> show >> Toyota is culpable. >> > > I think it's likely that there is some electronic glitch causing problems > with their cars and that Toyota is completely in the dark about how to > solve this problem. When this all blows over, we'll be able to give a > proper analysis of the situation and in hindsight, what Toyota should have > done. Today I'm not going to worry about it. :-) I heard they plan to upgrade to Windows 7. |