• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Onstar to give police ability to shut down your car.

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
because I know they're not. imagine that!

Really, how's that? I'm not saying Dave's right, just questioning how you can be so sure he's not. I think he's a great deal closer to the truth than many people realize. All the recent executive orders and tweaking of legislation in connection with The Patriot Act have put us in a position of no rights and the hammer may fall sooner than anyone wants to believe. I've got to go now, I'm being fitted for my new foil hat in 30 minutes. Do you have any idea how long I waited to get this appointment? Just had to make sure I did a little fear mongering before I stepped out.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Well, it is optional. I would put this in my car. This is more PR than anything. It's going to be slim pickings for onstar to fill their ads with calls from 911 dispatchers about a cop following their car, onstar turns it off, and the perp is nabbed.

I think your fear is unfounded--if a cop is only going to stop you because he can because you have onstar, but if you didn't have onstar he's not going to bother, where is the sense in that? A cop can stop you right now on a whim anyway. This just means there's no way for you to run, but if you're smart you won't run in the first place, should a cop decide he's gonna nab you.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Cars are already tracked.

I've installed the system.

On CSI Las Vegas last night they showed the cops using a system that looked up licenses plates as they were driving.

Every police car in the U.S. is to get this system.

It automatically logs and tracks every vehicle the system sees.

For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.

No, it doesnt. It compares your license plate with the registered owner to see if it is current, outstanding warrants, or on watch.

Launching an investigation? Once again youre full of shit. Proof or retract for once again making false allegations.
Troll.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.

Bullshit.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.
I don't care if you helped Gore invent the g'damn internet, you still fabricated the whole part about the system automagically data-mining and correlating financial transactions!

Please link to any system information backing up your claim... or did the Stargate Atlantis team forbid you to disclose the info again?

What do you think Check 21 is for?

Hint: It's not just for faster bank transactions.

It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

G'damn man.

PROOF OR RETRACT. Troll.
 
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.
I don't care if you helped Gore invent the g'damn internet, you still fabricated the whole part about the system automagically data-mining and correlating financial transactions!

Please link to any system information backing up your claim... or did the Stargate Atlantis team forbid you to disclose the info again?

What do you think Check 21 is for?

Hint: It's not just for faster bank transactions.

It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

G'damn man.

PROOF OR RETRACT. Troll.

Reason for 10 days is so the bank never has to worry about re-crediting

What are the warranty and indemnity rights?

Check 21 is confusing. It gives you the remedy of a prompt right to recredit, but only if you were provided with a substitute check.

Check 21 also gives you some rights if a substitute check was used but not provided to you, but you can't insist on a recredit within 10 business days to enforce those rights.

Check 21 creates two warranties by the bank that creates the substitute check and by all later banks that transfer either the substitute check or a paper or electronic representation of it. The first warranty is a warranty (promise) that the substitute check is legally equivalent to the original check. The second warranty is that the check won't be presented for payment if it has already been paid (no double payment). There is also a limited indemnity when the consumer suffers a loss because a substitute check was used. The details of, and restrictions on, these rights are described in material posted by the National Consumer Law Center in the article, "Banks Will No Longer Return Original Cancelled Checks," posted at: http://www.consumerlaw.org/initiatives/check21.shtml.

Why do consumers need the right of recredit?

Consumers can be harmed in several ways by the processing of an electronic image rather than the original check. First, both the paper check and the electronic image might be paid (double payment). Second, transferring the check back and forth between paper and electronic formats creates a risk that the amount on the paper check might be changed when it is turned into an electronic image for processing. Third, it may be impossible to prove that a check has been forged or altered without the original check. The switch to electronic imaging of checks means that the original check would not be held by the consumer or the consumer's bank. Instead, one of the other banks in the collection chain would have the original check. It is likely to take longer to find the check, and to get it back if it has not been destroyed, than if the consumer or the consumer's bank were holding it. A recredit right means that the consumer, not the bank, has the use of the funds while waiting to resolve the dispute.

When do consumers get a recredit right under Check 21?

Check 21 gives a recredit right only when a substitute check is used. The regulations take an even narrower view of this right, restricting it to only where a substitute check was provided to the consumer. Federal law on other types of electronic payments, such as debit card payments, gives consumers a more complete right of recredit.

How long will it take to get the disputed funds recredited?

The recredit must occur within 10 business days after the banking day on which it is requested, plus the bank gets one extra business day to make the funds available.

If the amount in dispute is more than $2,500, only the first $2,500 must be recredited in this time period.

Why didn't consumer groups support Check 21?

Consumers Union and other consumer groups believe that consumers should have a right to recredit for every check that is processed wholly or partly electronically.

Check 21 does not accomplish this, and it leaves open opportunities for new bank fees and new types of invasions of consumer financial privacy.


The Federal Reserve Board's regulations interpret the provisions of Check 21 very narrowly. Click here to read the comments filed by Consumers Union and other national consumer organizations about the problems with the proposed regulations on Check 21.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.
I don't care if you helped Gore invent the g'damn internet, you still fabricated the whole part about the system automagically data-mining and correlating financial transactions!

Please link to any system information backing up your claim... or did the Stargate Atlantis team forbid you to disclose the info again?

What do you think Check 21 is for?

Hint: It's not just for faster bank transactions.

It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

G'damn man.

PROOF OR RETRACT. Troll.

Reason for 10 days is so the bank never has to worry about re-crediting

What are the warranty and indemnity rights?

Check 21 is confusing. It gives you the remedy of a prompt right to recredit, but only if you were provided with a substitute check.

Check 21 also gives you some rights if a substitute check was used but not provided to you, but you can't insist on a recredit within 10 business days to enforce those rights.

Check 21 creates two warranties by the bank that creates the substitute check and by all later banks that transfer either the substitute check or a paper or electronic representation of it. The first warranty is a warranty (promise) that the substitute check is legally equivalent to the original check. The second warranty is that the check won't be presented for payment if it has already been paid (no double payment). There is also a limited indemnity when the consumer suffers a loss because a substitute check was used. The details of, and restrictions on, these rights are described in material posted by the National Consumer Law Center in the article, "Banks Will No Longer Return Original Cancelled Checks," posted at: http://www.consumerlaw.org/initiatives/check21.shtml.

Why do consumers need the right of recredit?

Consumers can be harmed in several ways by the processing of an electronic image rather than the original check. First, both the paper check and the electronic image might be paid (double payment). Second, transferring the check back and forth between paper and electronic formats creates a risk that the amount on the paper check might be changed when it is turned into an electronic image for processing. Third, it may be impossible to prove that a check has been forged or altered without the original check. The switch to electronic imaging of checks means that the original check would not be held by the consumer or the consumer's bank. Instead, one of the other banks in the collection chain would have the original check. It is likely to take longer to find the check, and to get it back if it has not been destroyed, than if the consumer or the consumer's bank were holding it. A recredit right means that the consumer, not the bank, has the use of the funds while waiting to resolve the dispute.

When do consumers get a recredit right under Check 21?

Check 21 gives a recredit right only when a substitute check is used. The regulations take an even narrower view of this right, restricting it to only where a substitute check was provided to the consumer. Federal law on other types of electronic payments, such as debit card payments, gives consumers a more complete right of recredit.

How long will it take to get the disputed funds recredited?

The recredit must occur within 10 business days after the banking day on which it is requested, plus the bank gets one extra business day to make the funds available.

If the amount in dispute is more than $2,500, only the first $2,500 must be recredited in this time period.

Why didn't consumer groups support Check 21?

Consumers Union and other consumer groups believe that consumers should have a right to recredit for every check that is processed wholly or partly electronically.

Check 21 does not accomplish this, and it leaves open opportunities for new bank fees and new types of invasions of consumer financial privacy.


The Federal Reserve Board's regulations interpret the provisions of Check 21 very narrowly. Click here to read the comments filed by Consumers Union and other national consumer organizations about the problems with the proposed regulations on Check 21.

You have failed to back up this allegation

It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

PROOF OR RETRACT.

Troll
 
Originally posted by: CPA
Skoorb, that assumes you did anything wrong to begin with. This is Orwellian to the core. I will not purchase a car with Onstar beginning 2009. Call me paranoid or a conspiricist, but I see nothing good coming of this.

I agree wholeheartedly
 
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: CPA
Skoorb, that assumes you did anything wrong to begin with. This is Orwellian to the core. I will not purchase a car with Onstar beginning 2009. Call me paranoid or a conspiricist, but I see nothing good coming of this.

I agree wholeheartedly

Although I understand the paranoia, the two things to keep in mind are 1. Onstar can be completely disabled without breaking any laws, and more importantly 2. it's only about half of GM's cars, not all cars from all makers. There are alot of choices out there.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: blackangst1
It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

PROOF OR RETRACT.

Troll

That came straight from the manager at two banks, Wells Fargo and IBC.

Have a problem with it consult with them.
ummm, nothing you posted regarding Check21 is even remotely related to police license plate scanning systems with alleged connections to credit bureaus' or Homeland Security's databases...

so wtf over?
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: blackangst1
It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

PROOF OR RETRACT.

Troll

That came straight from the manager at two banks, Wells Fargo and IBC.

Have a problem with it consult with them.

Notice how the worthless [deleted] troll doesn't actually tell you which managers at which bank locations.....but then tells you to consult with them.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
That came straight from the manager at two banks, Wells Fargo and IBC.

Have a problem with it consult with them.

Please post the bank branch address and phone number(s), and the name(s) of those you spoke with. I'm sure a fact checker or two would be happy to look in to it.
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
That came straight from the manager at two banks, Wells Fargo and IBC.

Have a problem with it consult with them.

Please post the bank branch address and phone number(s), and the name(s) of those you spoke with. I'm sure a fact checker or two would be happy to look in to it.

Wells Fargo at 17th and Logan, Denver Colorado. - Don't remember the Mgr name but they went through a manager change just as we were leaving anyway.

This is the same bank that stole over $500 from my account for 3 months of inactivity and cost me an additional $48 to close the account they put in a hole with their stealing.

IBC Bank Main st Grove Oklahoma - Angela is the Mgr.
 
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Starting with about 20 models for 2009, the service will be able to slowly halt a car that is reported stolen, and the radio may even speak up and tell the thief to pull over because police are watching.

The claim is that owners will have to give permission first for this capability to be enabled. Bull. I don't care what OnStar's privacy policy says, if the technical capability for this function is present, OnStar will have no practical choice but to comply when faced with a law enforcement demand or court order, whether or not owner "permission" was ever granted.


Give them a way to do something with your permission and the courts will give the cops the same method to do it WITHOUT your permission. Don't compare this with mandatory seat belts, 3rd tail lights, or airbags. Compare it to tasers. Why? Because when tasers were first introduced they were lauded as a means of replacing lethal force. Now all they have done is lower the threshhold for when force is used. They became the modern day billy club.

Sorry, the last thing I want is the ability for the cops or anyone else to gain control over my car. The fact is, if OnStar can do it someone else will figure out a way to do it as well.


Edit: GM's clearly stated privacy policies, which state, in short, that "OnStar will release information about a vehicle only for marketing research, to protect the rights, property, of safety of any person, in exigent circumstances, to prevent misuse of their service, when legally required to do so or when subject to a valid court order, or in various other circumstances", then you probably shouldn't buy a GM vehicle.

If you don't like it, buy something else. Or thats what the Conservatives would say.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: blackangst1
It was also direct connected to Homeland Security for screening.

PROOF OR RETRACT.

Troll

That came straight from the manager at two banks, Wells Fargo and IBC.

Have a problem with it consult with them.

Yeah well I have two sources who tell me Pelosi is having secret talks with the Chinese government about how to install a nationwide firewall to protect its citizens. Doesnt mean its true.

PROOF OR RETRACT. Damn troll.
 
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: Shivetya
Starting with about 20 models for 2009, the service will be able to slowly halt a car that is reported stolen, and the radio may even speak up and tell the thief to pull over because police are watching.

The claim is that owners will have to give permission first for this capability to be enabled. Bull. I don't care what OnStar's privacy policy says, if the technical capability for this function is present, OnStar will have no practical choice but to comply when faced with a law enforcement demand or court order, whether or not owner "permission" was ever granted.


Give them a way to do something with your permission and the courts will give the cops the same method to do it WITHOUT your permission. Don't compare this with mandatory seat belts, 3rd tail lights, or airbags. Compare it to tasers. Why? Because when tasers were first introduced they were lauded as a means of replacing lethal force. Now all they have done is lower the threshhold for when force is used. They became the modern day billy club.

Sorry, the last thing I want is the ability for the cops or anyone else to gain control over my car. The fact is, if OnStar can do it someone else will figure out a way to do it as well.


Edit: GM's clearly stated privacy policies, which state, in short, that "OnStar will release information about a vehicle only for marketing research, to protect the rights, property, of safety of any person, in exigent circumstances, to prevent misuse of their service, when legally required to do so or when subject to a valid court order, or in various other circumstances", then you probably shouldn't buy a GM vehicle.

If you don't like it, buy something else. Or thats what the Conservatives would say.

Thats exactly right. A very small percentage of cars on the road will even have this capability. America will vote with their checkbook just like they have putting Toyata the #2 carmaker in America.
 
Dave, nothing you wrote or linked to is even remotely related to police license plate scanners being tied into the credit bureaus and Homeland Security databases.
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Dave, nothing you wrote or linked to is even remotely related to police license plate scanners being tied into the credit bureaus and Homeland Security databases.

In a previous thread I posted the manufacturer and the databases it is connected to.

They have pulled that data from the website but I have it cached and will post to a new link.

In the meantime do a search on here for that thread.

Also here is some links still live:

10-7-2007 Automatic License Plate Scanners

License Plate Scanners Newest Tool For Police
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Dave, nothing you wrote or linked to is even remotely related to police license plate scanners being tied into the credit bureaus and Homeland Security databases.

In a previous thread I posted the manufacturer and the databases it is connected to.

They have pulled that data from the website but I have it cached and will post to a new link.

In the meantime do a search on here for that thread.

Also here is some links still live:

10-7-2007 Automatic License Plate Scanners

License Plate Scanners Newest Tool For Police
once again, neither of your links describes a connection to the credit bureaus or Homeland Security in any g'damn way.

From the second article:
and officers know immediately if a driver has a revoked license or if a car has been reported stolen.
As you can see, the information the system correlates and provides to officers has nothing to do with recent purchases and homeland Security.

Face it Dave, you made it up while stoned on a tinfoil high!
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Dave, nothing you wrote or linked to is even remotely related to police license plate scanners being tied into the credit bureaus and Homeland Security databases.

In a previous thread I posted the manufacturer and the databases it is connected to.

They have pulled that data from the website but I have it cached and will post to a new link.

In the meantime do a search on here for that thread.

Also here is some links still live:

10-7-2007 Automatic License Plate Scanners

License Plate Scanners Newest Tool For Police
once again, neither of your links describes a connection to the credit bureaus or Homeland Security in any g'damn way.

From the second article:
and officers know immediately if a driver has a revoked license or if a car has been reported stolen.
As you can see, the information the system correlates and provides to officers has nothing to do with recent purchases and homeland Security.

Face it Dave, you made it up while stoned on a tinfoil high!

Previous information I posted showed direct link to Homeland security, banks, transunion etc.

You just missed that thread.
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.
I don't care if you helped Gore invent the g'damn internet, you still fabricated the whole part about the system automagically data-mining and correlating financial transactions!

Please link to any system information backing up your claim... or did the Stargate Atlantis team forbid you to disclose the info again?

Am I the only person who thinks that if Dave really helped install such a system, telling everyone on the Internet about it would be incredibly illegal? I'm not saying he's right or wrong based on what he's saying, I'm only pointing out that people who know things like that are almost always prohibited from talking about it with random strangers.
 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
For example if you're plates are registered in New York and a police cruiser scans your plates in Florida it is automatically red flagged and a computer generated investigation begins into why you would be in Florida. It checks to see if there purchases related (Experian, Tansunion etc) for a trip to Disney World or a cruise etc and if there are relatives in the system etc.

If no reasonable reason can be found then an investigation automatically begins.
That's 100% unfounded Grade-A bullsh*t, and you damn well know it.

Excuse me.

I spent two years installing the system at every backbone hub in the country as well as at military installations.

Try again.
I don't care if you helped Gore invent the g'damn internet, you still fabricated the whole part about the system automagically data-mining and correlating financial transactions!

Please link to any system information backing up your claim... or did the Stargate Atlantis team forbid you to disclose the info again?

Am I the only person who thinks that if Dave really helped install such a system, telling everyone on the Internet about it would be incredibly illegal? I'm not saying he's right or wrong based on what he's saying, I'm only pointing out that people who know things like that are almost always prohibited from talking about it with random strangers.

Not if he can prove his bullshit claim of "Previous information I posted showed direct link to Homeland security, banks, transunion etc."

But he's full of shit. He never posted such a thing.
 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Am I the only person who thinks that if Dave really helped install such a system, telling everyone on the Internet about it would be incredibly illegal? I'm not saying he's right or wrong based on what he's saying, I'm only pointing out that people who know things like that are almost always prohibited from talking about it with random strangers.

I am monitored very closely.

They know I am not giving away any sensitive data such as locations, routes, ports etc.

Besides steps are in place for that any one of us guys ever get compromised.

Simple re-allocation measures.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Am I the only person who thinks that if Dave really helped install such a system, telling everyone on the Internet about it would be incredibly illegal? I'm not saying he's right or wrong based on what he's saying, I'm only pointing out that people who know things like that are almost always prohibited from talking about it with random strangers.

I am monitored very closely.

They know I am not giving away any sensitive data such as locations, routes, ports etc.

Besides steps are in place for that any one of us guys ever get compromised.

Simple re-allocation measures.

You said you posted links.

I call bullshit.

Go ahead and post those links and prove me wrong. Otherwise youre trolling. Again.
 
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Am I the only person who thinks that if Dave really helped install such a system, telling everyone on the Internet about it would be incredibly illegal? I'm not saying he's right or wrong based on what he's saying, I'm only pointing out that people who know things like that are almost always prohibited from talking about it with random strangers.

I am monitored very closely.

They know I am not giving away any sensitive data such as locations, routes, ports etc.

Besides steps are in place for that any one of us guys ever get compromised.

Simple re-allocation measures.

You said you posted links.

I call bullshit.

Go ahead and post those links and prove me wrong. Otherwise youre trolling. Again.

The search engine on AT now works.
 
Back
Top