Speed Limiters on Cars
Aaron Beezley
tasked with implementing a GPS controlled speed limiter in all designs
commencing in 2001.
I feel morally obligated to warn people this device will restrict speeds
to within 10% of the posted speed limits through satellite positioning
interaction software built into cars by 2001. In essence, your car will
not be able to travel any faster than the posted speed limit. The only
deviation allowed is passing another GPS equipped vehicle at which time
the system senses the speed of the car you are passing and then decides
what speed is "reasonable".
It will be initially sold as a "Safety Feature" with a disabling option
until the consumers are used to it, and final implementation by year
2004 will be removal of the disabling feature and its functionality will
be part of the emissions testing process. Disabling the feature,
although almost impossible, faces stiff penalties from local law
enforcement.
I am not a proponent of reckless speeding, but I feel this is an
encroachment on our personal freedoms enjoyed since the advent of
motorized vehicles.
John Kunkel
<snip>
> It will be initially sold as a "Safety Feature" with a disabling option
> until the consumers are used to it, and final implementation by year
> 2004 will be removal of the disabling feature and its functionality will
> be part of the emissions testing process. Disabling the feature,
> although almost impossible, faces stiff penalties from local law
> enforcement.
I predict that if this feature is, indeed, installed in future cars
there will be a cottage industry marketing disabling devices that
are readily installed and removed at inspection time. Just like "fool-
proof" devices, no device is tamper proof. Stiff penalties have never
been a major deterrent. The prisons are full.
>
> I am not a proponent of reckless speeding, but I feel this is an
> encroachment on our personal freedoms enjoyed since the advent of
> motorized vehicles.
Our personal freedom in motor vehicles has been gone for decades. Seat
belt/shoulder harness laws, helmet laws, etc. are harder to get around
than a simple electronic circuit.
John
Lifespeed
f...@gm.com wrote:
> As a design engineer at a major car manufacturer, my team has been
> tasked with implementing a GPS controlled speed limiter in all designs
> commencing in 2001.
I smell a troll...
> I feel morally obligated to warn people this device will restrict
speeds
> to within 10% of the posted speed limits through satellite positioning
> interaction software built into cars by 2001. In essence, your car
will
> not be able to travel any faster than the posted speed limit. The
only
> deviation allowed is passing another GPS equipped vehicle at which
time
> the system senses the speed of the car you are passing and then
decides
> what speed is "reasonable".
This statement appears false. Their is no way for your vehicle to "know"
if the vehicle being passed is GPS equipped. That's why they're called
RECEIVERS and not transmitters. Nor would your vehicle know the speed of
the vehicle being passed, or even that you were engaged in such an
activity. Cars are smart, but not that smart.
GPS alone does not supply the means for the described system.
--
- Lifespeed
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
locke
that all our freedoms are being chipped away. Big Brother installed in the
dash, who would have believed it 20 years ago? steve
Aaron Beezley <f...@gm.com> wrote in message news:376FE3...@gm.com...
> As a design engineer at a major car manufacturer, my team has been
> tasked with implementing a GPS controlled speed limiter in all designs
> commencing in 2001.
>
> to within 10% of the posted speed limits through satellite positioning
> interaction software built into cars by 2001. In essence, your car will
> not be able to travel any faster than the posted speed limit. The only
> deviation allowed is passing another GPS equipped vehicle at which time
> the system senses the speed of the car you are passing and then decides
> what speed is "reasonable".
>
> until the consumers are used to it, and final implementation by year
> 2004 will be removal of the disabling feature and its functionality will
> be part of the emissions testing process. Disabling the feature,
> although almost impossible, faces stiff penalties from local law
> enforcement.
>
the Joeman
know, only new Caddy's have the "accident response" GPS and it costs and
additional 1500 bucks to have installed along with the phone which is
attached to call for help (@10 a month) and something like $120 a year for
the GPS service.....
Did I forget to mention that our skies are damn near completely full of
satelites now? Imagine tracking a couple million cars??????
joeman
xlh1200
"Sportster tribute" http://www.nidlink.com/~hill1/
'51 chevy 2dr
Aaron Beezley wrote in message <376FE3...@gm.com>...
JTs Automotive
JT
JT's Automotive
12552 Pollan Street
Tyler Texas 75704
903\593-4094
Bob May
device that causes the other car to slow down and watch the fun+ACE- The other
guy will think that his car has a problem and then take it into the shop
just because of nothing.
--
Bob May
I don't read attachments to posts as they may give me a
virus If I expect an attachment from you I will open it..
You may have a brilliant thought but if you put it into an
attachment I won't read it and thus both you and I lose.
I don't like to say it but unfortunatly, there are those who
insist upon being nasty to the rest of us. Bob May
SNOWMAN629
>know, only new Caddy's have the "accident response" GPS and it costs and
>additional 1500 bucks to have installed along with the phone which is
>attached to call for help (@10 a month) and something like $120 a year for
>the GPS service.....
>
>Did I forget to mention that our skies are damn near completely full of
>satelites now? Imagine tracking a couple million cars??????
>
>joeman
I too think the original post is slightly farfetched. The reasons are not as
posted in yout reply. A GPS unit is a receiver, it does not transmit. There
is no tracking of the vehicle so there is no need for any more satellites or
tracking systems.
In this country the government uses SA to (for lack of another word ) distort
the accuraccy of GPS systems. Your unit may be off by up to 300 feet or so (
there are different opinions on the inaccuracy ). If GPS systems were 100%
accurate this theory proposed by the original poster could actually work. The
mapping and speed limit information would be kept in a computer in the vehicle
and the GPS would only send the signal of your location to that computer.
Problem is that with a 100 meter false reading the gps may put you on a
backstreet with a 15 mph limit when you are actually on a highway with a speed
limit of 70.
Any one interested in GPS information should check out sci.geo.satellite-nav...
while there you can get URLs for a few very good websites.
As far as the Caddy's "accident response" GPS. You are partly paying for
"peace of mind". The 120 per year is probably a monitoring fee. I do know
there is no service fee for GPS use... I use a Garmin GPSIII plus handheld GPS
everyday. The units are pretty expensive ( and with the more features you get
the price could become rediculous ).
SNOWMAN629
>device that causes the other car to slow down and watch the fun+ACE- The
>other
>guy will think that his car has a problem and then take it into the shop
>just because of nothing.
I wonder what happens when the Satellite signal is lost. Does you car shut
off? A GPS will lose signal in thick trees. I guess you'll be OK if you're
in the middle of a field in a flat area but get in a city or mountainous area
and good luck getting a signal.
David Stevens
morally obligated to warn people that this is bullshit. If you believed
Aarons (admirably creative) fantasy, please don't vote anymore. TIA.
David
Kinetic
I betcha this is a troll.
But if it isn't, I'm not too worried. My car was built in the USA, in
1986. It will go 130 mph. By the time I buy a car built after 2004, folks
will have figured out how to defeat this (alleged) function.
I don't care how well integrated into the car it is, it was designed by
people. People can design a way around it. At WORST a complete aftermarket
ECM/ PCM, at best a flash-reprogram job...
Also, GPS has a designed-in uncertainty factor. It is not accurate enough
(intentionally) to guide bombs, how could it tell between 2 parallel roads
with differing limits?
The average car on the road is 10 years old. Think about the horrid
traffic problems of mixing limited and non-limited cars on existing
highways.
Also, who is going to keep up with the huge database of every road, with
corresponding speed info? What about updates, speed changes, road changes?
This is neither feasible, desirable, nor in the true interest of safety.
This is a troll. Risen up from under the bridge, ready to step in the way
of a car he believes will screech to a halt at the command of his handheld
GPS jammer. :-)
Do all *@gm.com net news accounts post through RemarQ? I'd figure GM
would have their own news server... The headers in this post just don't
seem right.... Ahh, well.... So it goes with Usenet.
Would a real GM employee out and say this, plus give an e-mail address and
name? This smacks of the same lunacy evident in last weeks "oil leak law"
troll.
Yes, I am guilty of feeding the troll.... <sigh...>
Peace,
Kinetic D.