i am begining to think that this is getting read a little too far into. the government requirements are only calling for data recording similar to what already appears in many vehicles.
currently the systems that GM has in it's vehicles maintain a 5 second snap shot of the data sent and received by the coputer in the car. the more advanced units have g-load sensors built in to them to provide data about angles and forces invovled in accidents.
these systems are also currently not legal for use by insurance companies or the government to determine fault or penalty for an accident. they are legal only as research data for the auto industry to help produce safer vehicles.
there is no broadcast or data transfer device included in the "black box" that would be able to tell whomever is watching what you are wearing, doing, eating, getting some from, or anything else that may take place in a car.
the article you are all basing you opinion on is yet another "what if" ******** text being passed off as news. just look at all the key words and phrases being used:
"They can" - implying the capability, not the practice of
"Tied into GPS navigation computers, EDRs could give" - implying that there is a communication system included with this device, which there isn't
"or make it impossible for a person injured in a crash to deny he wasn't wearing a seat belt." - so now this guy wants us to be afraid we will be sacrificing the ability to be on a jury for another frivolous law suit. you know that breaks my heart
it jsut goes on with a bunch of paranoid rantings about what "could" and "may" be done. wake up to the reality that life and our government are not as big and scary as the media wants you to believe.
BTW, before anyone starts blaming the republicans or W for all this, it was under the presidencyof a liberal named Clinton that GM's research project into this type of data recording was funded by the NHTSA