Rider Aid Systems - Fear of Technology

Good analysis of the issue in the January issue.

More knowledge is always a good thing.

A related future issue is the hijacking of this technology by those who think themselves our betters.  How long will it be before insurance companies will prompt compliant politicians to convert this technology into actual nannies?  Maybe the DMV, following the lowest common denominator approach of traffic laws generally, eliminates choice and sets the "level" at "one size fits all."  

Somewhere I read or heard that GM's On-Star system already is being used in accident reconstruction.  You can already get a discount on your car insurance by agreeing to the installation of a black box that records your driving habits.

Will TWKB (those who know better) go for the revenue with automatic uplinks from statutory black boxes that trigger tickets issued over the internet - all by computers, no human involved?  Or, will TWKB just impose the nanny - statutory black boxes that govern our speed by way of GPS link to speed limit databases?  

The premise is a bit paranoia-laden.

It's doubtful that the technology will be "highjacked" for purposes of law enforcement or insurance purposes, because there's a big difference between automobiles and motorcycles in this country. Namely, a motorcycle is a "luxury" purchase, while an automobile is "necessity" purchase. The majority of potential motorcycle customers see Big Brother auto-monitoring their vehicles, and they'll just walk away. Automobiles are seen as a necessary living asset however, so eventually customers have to give in at some point in the four-wheeled market (which is already happening).

Another aspect we have in our favor is that the motorcycle market is so tiny in comparison to the automobile industry that as long as we stay off the politician's radar, they'll leave us alone to enjoy our sport in relative peace. It's when highway deaths begin to rise, or packs of roving hooligans see fit to demonstrate their supposed bike-handling skills in the middle of traffic, or someone who thinks that a MotoGP-rivaling exhaust noise level is their God-given right, that the TWKB committees will focus their eye on us and look at ways to nanny our sport.  

Good points, and yeah, the idea is a bit edgy.

Yet, as you say, we do have those hooligans and we do have those loud pipes  . . . .

We're not to small for the DOT or the EPA. For example, we have a market segment of the MC industry selling "fender eliminators" because DOT regulations dictate that the OEMs build ugly tail light/reflector assemblies.  With bright LEDs we don't need a regulation dictating the minimum area of a tail light.  I don't need to elaborate on after market pipes.  

When I say we're too small the DOT or EPA to worry about, I mean that we're small enough that they don't see the need to go out and enforce those regulations regarding fender eliminators and other aftermarket DOT-sidestepping products such as HID headlights, etc. The DOT has since cracked down on aftermarket HID retrofit headlight products for the import car crowd because they became so popular; that's an example of being a large enough market segment that the federal government will take notice.

But all it takes is one or several idiots to piss off someone with political power, and suddenly we're right up on the radar screen of politicians. The CA SB435 bill signed into law by Schwartzenegger before he left office is a perfect example. The author of the bill, Sen. Fran Pavley of Agoura Hills, had complained of waking up to open-piped bikes (you can guess what type) heading toward the Rock Store every weekend morning, so she sought a method of requiring those riders to put their stock pipes back on. Although she was staved off for a while after attempting to push through bills for several years that would require motorcyclists to have their bikes smog checked biannually just as with automobiles, she eventually found a political way to have the governor sign off on a bill that requires EPA certification for any aftermarket exhaust sold after Jan 1, 2013 to be street-legal.

Stay off the government's radar, and we're fine. Do something stupid to get on their radar, and no amount of anti-government rhetoric will justify the selfishness and ignorance that got us into that mess.  

It is a cultural phenomenon in our society today to label questions or concerns regarding liberty and the potential infringements on freedom as “paranoia-laden”. However, with an unbiased review of history, the erroneous disposition of this argument is exposed as a complete fraud. History has proven over and over again, that most men, given the fondness for power have the natural tendency to abuse it. The question as to whether or not technology will be used to monitor individual’s behavior has already been answered, and the debate is now over. The answer is unequivocally, YES!
The technology of radar has been used for decades to monitor the speed of vehicles as well as the use of small aircraft. As a response to the growing number of radar detectors used by drivers to be alerted that someone is trying to trap them, laser technology was implemented to monitor a driver’s speed. Red light cameras which are now common-place and are used extensively around the world, use High Speed / High Def cameras linked to traffic lights and police commands centers to catch someone turning left on yellow. In some places, speed cameras have been actually been implemented. Many major cities across the US not only have these traffic cameras, but general neighborhood cameras placed at each corner. The police command centers are also linked to all private security cameras in these cities which allow the police to access virtually every feed.
Drones that are virtually invisible to the human eye and purportedly created for the military only or to guard our borders are now being used by the sheriff and local police. http://www.examiner.com/city-buzz-in-charlotte/local-sheriff-and-police-using-predator-b-drones-the-fight-on-crime  “Drones have been used to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the N.C. Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air--close enough to identify faces”. Furthermore, the installation of crash data recorders or “Black Boxes”, are now becoming an overwhelming trend for the automotive industry. As of today these recorders monitor speed, brake use, etc. BMW’s K1300s currently has a box on it right now that your dealer has access to that records data including your highest speed.
You buy a license plate from the state you already pay taxes in, to be allowed to travel freely on the road that your tax dollars pay for. Your dossier or profile is linked to this license plate detailing your driving record and any arrest history. Additionally you are required to buy a drivers license to operate a vehicle. This can be revoked at anytime. All your data is put into a system that is linked to virtually every patrol car in the nation. You can be pulled over for virtually any indiscretion imaginable. Your vehicle and private papers may be searched EVEN if you do NOT consent to a search. All of this, a violation of our right to privacy protected by the 4th amendment. The use of satellite imagery is now openly being discussed in the media as a future tool in aiding something as petty as traffic violations.
ONSTAR is a bizarre system that gives over the control of your vehicle to another person and can be used to remotely turn off your car if it is stolen. The ONSTAR person has the right to keep the voice connection open as long as he/she feels it’s necessary –for example: in the event that a person in the car is wanted by the police.
The tax-payer funded academic research for green technology has already stated that when electric vehicles are finally implemented, every vehicle on the road will have a black box installed which will record every mile and every location that the vehicle travels and you will be charged per mile (as gasoline tax will no longer pay for the roads). Toll roads have all but become totally automated, as we all purchase those little Electronic Toll Passes that record who, when, and where and what speed we were traveling and then charges us for that luxury.
With regard to your future options you will not be able to just “walk away from a motorcycle purchase” if it is required to by law to be manufactured with a black box. I am not sure what “anti-government rhetoric” means exactly, but if it means being concerned with the rights and protections of each and every citizen - rights that are protected by our founding law- a law that millions of Americans have selflessly given their lives for, then I guess I will always be open to that conversation. By the way, I did Google “anti-government rhetoric” and came up with the following list: Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Alex de Tocqueville, Martin Luther King Jr, Goethe, Gandhi, Henry David Thoreau, Nikolayevich Tolstoy to name a few.
Anyone who claims that technology will not be high-jacked by law enforcement, is either living in a cave, in complete denial, or agrees with the direction that our society is heading. To deny this is absurd. Labeling these questions as “paranoia-laden” is misguided at the least. Nothing mentioned above can be disputed. The only question that matters in the future will be if society accepts moving from a semi-controlled society to a complete police state, but I am afraid we may already be there.  

My my...touch a nerve, have we?

I guess you've helped define the terms "paranoia" and "anti-government rhetoric"...  

The key here is not to fear technology changes and advancements, but to embrace them for your own benefit. Information can work both ways. I have a GPS monitoring device in my work truck that is connected to my own internet account that tracks the truck on a 24hr basis. I can use the information to help manage my fuel mileage better for my work route, it helps me to reduce unnecessary idling, if my truck is stolen I can find it immediately, if I get stopped for speeding I can prove in court that I wasn't and if I ever get falsely accused of something I have proof of my whereabouts.

Information monitoring technology has also been used for our benefit. Murderers and criminals have been caught by triangulation of their cell usage, video surveillance in stores and banks has helped to prove or disprove someones culpability.

I have better things to do than to worry about whether I am being monitored or not, I live my life on my own terms and if someone wants to watch or monitor I don't really care.

If a silly law aimed at motorcycles gets passed, so what. Obey the law and still enjoy your ride.

It's time for people to stop fretting about everything that is going on around them and enjoy life.

Technological change is inevitable, it all depends on how you look at it.

Now let's use this forum to discuss and fret about motorcycles - that's a lot more fun!!!!!!  
Ride Proud, Ride Safe, Have Fun.

No one said we shoudn't obey the law.  
No one said we shouldn't adopt new tech.  
And, yes, those who obey the law have nothing to be afraid of.
All of that is beside the point.

The issue is whether individuals should be free to decide for themselves how to conduct themselves, to take risks - motorcycles, rock climbing, skiing, bicycling, drinking, sex, drugs, sky diving, eating pizza - you name it.

This thread is on a related issue, the use of technology, by those who in effect claim some degree of ownership of my body, to stop such conduct as they object to.

All I'm saying is "no one owns me, and there's a new andimproved threat to our freedom to do as we will with our own motorcycles (bodies), take notice, if you care."

There are many risks that I have taken that others would claim to be wreckless; the fact that I am here, and that I have done no harm to others, shows that their claim at the least was overstated.  

The value of freedom is underestimated.  

I can understand that someone who learned to ride a motorcycle before ABS or Traction Control not liking the change because it is something that takes some control of the bike from the rider, but I do not see how this technological change is related to, or represents a change in civil liberties. The two things are not even related to each other. One represents an attempt by motorcycle companies to make motorcycles safer, the other is a social and political issue as a result of increased information gathering and surveillance from a variety of groups and individuals.

I have three bikes, two have ABS and one does not. I purchased each bike because it fitted into a particular style of riding. One is a street bike (BMW with Full Time ABS), one is a Dual Sport (BMW with ABS, option to turn off), and the other is a Ducati (no ABS). When I purchased the ones with ABS I did not see the ABS as an intrusion on my riding but simply a feature of that particular model. Chances are that the next bike I purchase will probably have both ABS and Traction Control, if these have an "Off Switch" I would prefer it, but if they don't, this will not stop me from making the purchase if I really like the bike.  

The point I am trying to make is, if we want to talk about motorcycle "nanny devices" let's do that and stick to it, and not couple it with a "political civil liberties" discussion. The two things are not even related.

It's obvious that the people on this forum are passionate about motorcycles so let's keep the discussion to things motorcycle related.  
Ride Proud, Ride Safe, Have Fun.

kento1:
My my...touch a nerve, have we?

I guess you've helped define the terms "paranoia" and "anti-government rhetoric"...

 Kento, I don’t think we are arguing the same issue. Your point about staying under that radar is completely valid. I'm trying however to understand your response and I am perplexed. Everything I posted was fact. Do you deny these facts? My intention was to provide evidence to the contrary -- that technology is and has been high-jacked to restrict civil liberties. Do you deny these facts? Please explain and provide evidence that the facts I supplied were incorrect. Xbackslider questioned how the rapid growth of technology may or may not interfere with civil liberties in the future, in particular how motorcycles will be affected (a refreshing post to this forum). Your response to his post was to essentially label such questions a bit "paranoid and anti-government rhetoric". In response to your post, I cite factual evidence (including specific motorcycle models already monitored and specific events such as motorcyclists in NC who had been monitored by law enforcement using drones). Your response to my post was to label it the definition of “paranoid and anti-government rhetoric”? Is that what you meant? WOW! You just moved down 1 step in my book. "Now ya at -1".
So tell me which one of us should go back to addressing the daily “which should I get, a 600 or 1000 as first bike" post? By the way, when you label something anti-government rhetoric, make sure that it is not just anti-corruption rhetoric.  Using labels to demean and degrade someone is not polite.  

Your elongated reaction to my reply to xbacksideslider (and I'm hopeful he hasn't taken the same meaning you did, but I'm pretty confident he didn't, judging by his replies) had more demeaning intent than mine. All I said was that his premise was "a bit paranoia-laden"; if I had intended to "demean and degrade" xbacksideslider for his views on that topic, I'd have used terms ("living in a cave", etc.) and length more approximating your post.

My original remark about "anti-government rhetoric" was basically to say that complaining about possible future government-mandated technological intervention in our sport such as GPS speed limiters and black box communication with law enforcement rings pretty hollow when there are selfish riders out there basically putting us on the front of general public news media for those very reasons.

I'm not doubting that your myriad accusations may be factual, but I'm not about to take a fear-mongering position (at least with regards to motorcycle electronics), because in the grand scheme of things, we're just too small a factor for them to go through the trouble. I don't disagree that technology can be used for subversive purposes; never stated that. What I don't agree with is the belief that soon we'll be outlawed by a "police state" bent on destroying our sport using that technology-- UNLESS we bring that attention to ourselves.

As I stated, we're just not a large enough market to bother with. Motorcycles are not considered a "necessary commodity" like automobiles are in this country. If that technology is used for subversive purposes, the vast majority of potential customers who don't like that idea will "just walk away" and not buy motorcycles if they know they are being used that way, and the OEMs know that. Nobody will be pointing a gun at their head forcing them to buy the motorcycle, but the same can't be said about automobiles, because that vehicle has become a utilitarian part of this country's daily life, so people will put up with it and continue to buy them (as I stated they already are).

Perhaps we weren't arguing about the same issue, although a large part of your feeling maligned is due to your strong beliefs on personal freedoms, and the sensitivity to the terms I used and how they were used. For that, I will come out and apologize for that last post. However, the reason that I don't take such a fatalistic view of this country is because I've been to many other countries around the world that have but a fraction of our freedoms, a few in fact that nearly approximate the "police state" you speak of. Things could be a helluva lot worse, believe me.

The fact of the matter is that if we can't police ourselves (motorcyclists, I mean), then yes, we will end up with those TWKB committee threats to our sport.  

Kent is correct, we should look in the mirror.

That agreed, it is worthwhile to highlight a potential threat to motorcyclists' liberty.  Consciousness raising is a good thing.  That threat relates to motorcycles, it is relevant.  Why should I, or anyone, in the best interests motorcycling, suppress those thoughts?  

xbacksideslider,

I also agree that Kento is correct in regards to the fact that a minority of motorcyclists with aggressive tendencies are giving a bad name to all motorcyclists. We are all being painted with the same brush. Bad press and public misunderstanding are a greater threat to the motorcycling freedom that we now enjoy, rather than advancements in motorcycle technology.

The last thing we need is some politician somewhere seeing an opportunity to bash our sport for some political gain.

Public education on both motorcycle awareness while driving, and improvements in motorcycle design and safety would go a long way in changing the image of our sport.
This is where a magazine like Sport Rider is important because it promotes practical safe riding, and critiques changes in technology.
I would like to see a television program that concentrates on motorcycle riding techniques and safety become a popular show on the Speed Channel or some other channel.
Some of the best motorcycle riders are "motorcycle cops" who practice safe effective riding techniques in a wide variety of circumstances. A popular reality show that showcases motorcycle police and their bikes would be great program to help promote our sport.

A good dose of positive press and publicity would go a long way to change the public image of our sport and help to secure the riding freedom that we now enjoy.  
Ride Proud, Ride Safe, Have Fun.

xbacksideslider:
Kent is correct, we should look in the mirror.

That agreed, it is worthwhile to highlight a potential threat to motorcyclists' liberty.  Consciousness raising is a good thing.  That threat relates to motorcycles, it is relevant.  Why should I, or anyone, in the best interests motorcycling, suppress those thoughts?

There is no reason to suppress thoughts such as yours. Raising consciousness on various relevant topics is important.  

Happy New Year~~safe riding....