GPS that gets you where you're going -- at or under the speed limit
By Ryan Block 
posted November 29th 2005 10:55AM
posted November 29th 2005 10:55AM
This wasn't exactly what we had in mind when we signed up for in-car GPS, but Transport Canada (the Canadian version
of the US Department of Transportation) is road-testing an integrated GPS device that correlates your street location
with the speed limit, and makes it "difficult" for you to go any faster than it. Apparently this isn't the first time a
system like this has been given trial, but we're still wary — sometimes speeding, though a highly undesirable driving
practice, is necessary. Think: medical emergency, or what if you're late to your true love's wedding with the wrong
guy, and you have to pound on the glass from above screaming her name? This system could ruin everything.
[Via MobileMag]
Ah, yes, this has "commercial success" written all over it. Meh. The last thing people want to pay for is a digital version of their mother-in-law yelling "slow down, slow down!"
Fuck you, Canada.
It also has lawsuit written all over it. "Yes, your honor. I tried accelerating to avoid the vehicle quickly coming up behind me but I couldn't get out of the way in time. The device wouldn't let me. I deserve millions for being injured ine a rear-end collision..."
I had the pleasure of driving my parents for 7 hrs over Thanksgiving weekend, that was bad enough.
Have you ever driven through the majority of Canada?!? I'm not talking about cowboys driving their SUVs in the city, I'm talking about a country where people cite TIME instead of DISTANCE when you ask them how far it is between places (aka, "How far is it between Calgary and Edmonton?" "Oh, about 3.5 hours.") We don't care how far the distance is, only that we want to make it there in a reasonable amount of time without wiping out on the highway in the middle of winter.
Have you ever driven through the majority of Canada?!? I'm not talking about cowboys driving their SUVs in the city, I'm talking about a country where people cite TIME instead of DISTANCE when you ask them how far it is between places (aka, "How far is it between Calgary and Edmonton?" "Oh, about 3.5 hours.") We don't care how far the distance is, only that we want to make it there in a reasonable amount of time without wiping out on the highway in the middle of winter.
Yes! It WILL ruin things! Don't EVER give in to this vicious invasion of privacy and rights!!
It's not just Canada:
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-268747.html?legacy=cnet
Since driving is a privilege, and not a right, I do not mind this sort of limitation. I think it will be better utilized within urban areas than in the backcountry.
Pounding on the glass from above screaming her name, eh? Am I feeling some Wayne's World 2 here?
This story is missing the fact that there is no way Canada would make this MANDATORY in every car... it would likely be an incentive for lower insurance, or mandatory in repeat DUI/speeding offenders.
With regards #3 if the car behind you was also mandated to use this then it wouldn't be coming up that quickly behind you, toss in the braking system that Mercedes is rolling out, or the adaptive cruise control available in Cadillacs and what not and you're getting closer and closer to cars that can drive themselves. I predict in 15 years your car will be able to drive itself, and within 25 it will have to.
I agree with Jeff. This could be really dangerous if you need to accelerate to avoid an accident, or if you've finally gotten a chance to pass the really slow driver ahead of you and need to exceed the speed limit to safely get around them.
Homer: "Sure it might save a few lives, but millions will be late!"
CASSANDRA!!!
I might see Jesse's (#9?) point on clarifying the story. This could be useful for tracking Level III Sex Offenders, multiple DUI offenders, basically: criminals. But not tax-paying, law-abiding citizens! Can you imagine if our fearless, honorable (http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/28/cunningham/index.html) , and unbribable politicians ever get the insane idea of making it mandatory for all vehicles in the US to have a GPS chip built into it? Goddam, I can't believe I just said that. Editor, please remove that GPS idea from my post!!!
saxon you are actually "feeling" a reference to the movie the graduate.
#8 = moran
LOL did you really need to explain what Transport Canada was? Man you must think your readers are idiots...
No thanks, America Junior.
#9 & #14 -- Here's a hint:
A little movie called "The Graduate" (1967)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061722/
GPS jammer...
When Everyone has Speed enforcing GPS, only the hackers can Speed!
No thanks, America Junior.
---
Damnit, it's a labelled map. I wanted to quiz some American Idiots.
(PS. The Map has Vic and Vancouver, but not our biggest city? tee hee)
Heh, That would never work here in Quebec, where driving like your in a F1 race, is the norm. Maybe in Ontario though... :-)
Oh and BTW, #2 Mike - Fuck you too!
Cheers!
Not a problem, shove a pc in the trunk and use it for GPS, oh and nice reference to The Graduate.
worst idea ever. and i think it's pretty clear that he was referring to Bubbleboy with the pounding on the glass bit.
Actually, I can see this being an insanely cost-effective way for gov't to police speed limits.
So here's the deal: you can get commercial GPS for $100-ish, and it'll just give you directions and stay out of your way.
Or the gov't will give you a GPS for free, but it'll stop working if you speed for greater than 1 minute (add rules to counteract gaming).
And... What happens if you need to, say, PASS someone???
Fuck this shit, Ill let you know how fast I want to go and if it breaks the law I'll deal with that then. But don't ever tell me what you think a 'safe' limit is for myself.
"
But don't ever tell me what you think a 'safe' limit is for myself.
"
I speed as much as the next guy, but I'm kinda glad the public need is handled this (proactive) way, rather than charging speeders with negligent homocide when they kill someone...
Ryan could also be refering to the Simpsons episode where Grandpa Simpson has to stop his true love from marrying Mr Burns. ;)
#28 Shadyman
It's the governments view that if you need to exceed the speed limit to PASS someone, then you don't need to pass them, as you are already driving at or close to the speed limit.
Unfortunately, overtaking has never been a valid defence for speeding.
Being able to exceed the speed limit is important for SAFE driving; it is the best method for getting as much empty space between vehicles as possible.
I was in a line of traffic today of one semi passing another semi, a task that took them 15 minutes to accomplish, as traffic piled up behind them. Those crowded behind were going the speed limit by the way... the trucks were not.
There should be a law against passing a vehicle at a speed difference slower than it would take a healthy individual to walk the same distance.
I think this is the stupidiest idea I have ever heard of. The meaning of North America is driving and freedom. I don't see why the state should be involved behind our wheels. Every normal person is able judge wheter it is safe or not to press down on the gas or not and if there is someone who doesn't, the speed tickets, the tort laws are there to control the dangerous driving and there is no need at all to have such devices. And besides, whenever you are alone on a highway, I don't think that there is a problem about going 90 mph/hr, even if it is not permitted, if you are driving in good weater conditions. If you let the government getting involved in the people's private life by this kind of device, than there will be no end, just like in a communist country!