Posted: 9/18/2011 12:07:14 AM EDT
| I just saw this link in another thread and was wondering. Is having a blackbox recording your speed protection from CHP (can't handle patrol) trying to increase state revenue? |
|
Your GPS data against a sworn police officer's word?
I think the chances of you getting pulled over for not speeding and having the GPS data to prove that are slightly smaller than hitting the next mega-lotto. I really don't think the police are trolling the highways for non-speeders because there's so damn many speeders! Most of the time the police are going to come at you with a training officer operating a calibrated piece of equipment. Your GPS data can be altered with ease making it less than admissible in court. If it were to truly be a black box - complete with an audit ability (say a PKI locked periodic hash was generated for each data point) and the company would stand up in court and validate the audit ability for the court you'd have a run at it. Eight years ago I had an idea for a patent on exactly this sort of device which I called the "the Unbiased Observer" - a video camera with a wide angle lens and a microphone plus a GPS and a G sensor. The thing would only record about 10 minutes of video in a loop. There would be three ways of stopping the recording - the microphone detecting the sound of a gun shot, the G sensor detecting a sudden stop (car accident), or a recessed button being pushed. Those events would save and lock the last 5 minutes and next five minutes worth of video and audio. There would be two "shots" in the machine so if a second trigger event happened you'd get another 10 minute slice of life. Two different designs - one to sit behind the rear view mirror facing forward on government cars and trucks, the other designed to connect to an officer's uniform possibly high on the shoulder like the remote microphones. The units would be sold dang close to cost ... I'd make my millions following the uses of them. Traffic accidents with government vehicles and shootings are goldmines of losses for cities. Once an event were to happen the unit would be returned to the factory under train of custody. The unit would be opened and the video extracted - the deal is that the video wouldn't be useable - editable - alterable - except by my equipment. A defense lawyer couldn't argue that the video was altered by the city or state - "unbiased". The video would be returned and I would hire out experts in the encryption and extraction processes to validate the system to the courts. |
|
Not if you're speeding. Save yourself $300 and obey traffic laws. Simple.
Quoted:
I just saw this link in another thread and was wondering. Is having a blackbox recording your speed protection from CHP (can't handle patrol) trying to increase state revenue? |
|
Quoted:
Your GPS data against a sworn police officer's word? I think the chances of you getting pulled over for not speeding and having the GPS data to prove that are slightly smaller than hitting the next mega-lotto. I really don't think the police are trolling the highways for non-speeders because there's so damn many speeders! Most of the time the police are going to come at you with a training officer operating a calibrated piece of equipment. Your GPS data can be altered with ease making it less than admissible in court. If it were to truly be a black box - complete with an audit ability (say a PKI locked periodic hash was generated for each data point) and the company would stand up in court and validate the audit ability for the court you'd have a run at it. Eight years ago I had an idea for a patent on exactly this sort of device which I called the "the Unbiased Observer" - a video camera with a wide angle lens and a microphone plus a GPS and a G sensor. The thing would only record about 10 minutes of video in a loop. There would be three ways of stopping the recording - the microphone detecting the sound of a gun shot, the G sensor detecting a sudden stop (car accident), or a recessed button being pushed. Those events would save and lock the last 5 minutes and next five minutes worth of video and audio. There would be two "shots" in the machine so if a second trigger event happened you'd get another 10 minute slice of life. Two different designs - one to sit behind the rear view mirror facing forward on government cars and trucks, the other designed to connect to an officer's uniform possibly high on the shoulder like the remote microphones. The units would be sold dang close to cost ... I'd make my millions following the uses of them. Traffic accidents with government vehicles and shootings are goldmines of losses for cities. Once an event were to happen the unit would be returned to the factory under train of custody. The unit would be opened and the video extracted - the deal is that the video wouldn't be useable - editable - alterable - except by my equipment. A defense lawyer couldn't argue that the video was altered by the city or state - "unbiased". The video would be returned and I would hire out experts in the encryption and extraction processes to validate the system to the courts. So??? What happened?? (Fricken cliff hanger) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Your GPS data against a sworn police officer's word? I think the chances of you getting pulled over for not speeding and having the GPS data to prove that are slightly smaller than hitting the next mega-lotto. I really don't think the police are trolling the highways for non-speeders because there's so damn many speeders! Most of the time the police are going to come at you with a training officer operating a calibrated piece of equipment. Your GPS data can be altered with ease making it less than admissible in court. If it were to truly be a black box - complete with an audit ability (say a PKI locked periodic hash was generated for each data point) and the company would stand up in court and validate the audit ability for the court you'd have a run at it. Eight years ago I had an idea for a patent on exactly this sort of device which I called the "the Unbiased Observer" - a video camera with a wide angle lens and a microphone plus a GPS and a G sensor. The thing would only record about 10 minutes of video in a loop. There would be three ways of stopping the recording - the microphone detecting the sound of a gun shot, the G sensor detecting a sudden stop (car accident), or a recessed button being pushed. Those events would save and lock the last 5 minutes and next five minutes worth of video and audio. There would be two "shots" in the machine so if a second trigger event happened you'd get another 10 minute slice of life. Two different designs - one to sit behind the rear view mirror facing forward on government cars and trucks, the other designed to connect to an officer's uniform possibly high on the shoulder like the remote microphones. The units would be sold dang close to cost ... I'd make my millions following the uses of them. Traffic accidents with government vehicles and shootings are goldmines of losses for cities. Once an event were to happen the unit would be returned to the factory under train of custody. The unit would be opened and the video extracted - the deal is that the video wouldn't be useable - editable - alterable - except by my equipment. A defense lawyer couldn't argue that the video was altered by the city or state - "unbiased". The video would be returned and I would hire out experts in the encryption and extraction processes to validate the system to the courts. So??? What happened?? (Fricken cliff hanger) I'm guessing protection of state revenue. |
|
Nothing ... I just let it go. At the time it would have cost me close to $900 for the idea and I didn't want to lay out that much money. They're on the market now.
Another idea I had is in production ... have to give it away as property of the US tax payer as I came up with the idea and developed it working for my Uncle Sam. |