Posts tagged communicate

DOT: Smart Cars to Communicate Wirelessly to Avoid Crashes




By Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism

DOT: Smart Cars to Communicate Wirelessly to Avoid Crashes




The Department of Transportation (DoT) announced the agency will push for the development of a short-range radio system that will allow cars to “speak” to one another in an aim to prevent car crashes and other vehicle mishaps.

Referred to as dedicated short-range communications (DSRC), the device uses 3G and 4G cellular networks that are dependent on internet-based services.

Funded by the Joint Program Office (JPO), the DoT and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA), this move toward tying vehicles to the internet of things is being sold to the public as a way to ensure “safer driving”.

This technology, called vehicle-to-vehicle communications (V2V) would facilitate one car to communicate with another and trigger the braking system to activate and steering to avoid collisions while warning drivers to avert the potential danger from 300 feet away.

Light-weight vehicles will be required to have wireless chips installed in order for cars to “talk” to each other as they travel down the road.

Anthony Foxx, secretary of the DoT told the press : “This is just the beginning of a revolution in roadway safety. I don’t think you can understate the significance of having vehicles that are smart enough to recognize that an accident is about to happen and can step in to stop it.”

Foxx stated that before Obama leaves office, rules and regulations will be in place for installing this technology in vehicles that travel on the roadways and highways.

The DoT secretary claims that “the benefits here will clearly outweigh any concerns about cost” while also keeping silent about the estimated initial monies needed to implement this endeavor.

Fox stated: “Keeping drivers safe is the most important advantage of V2V, but it’s just one of many. V2V can also help reduce congestion and save fuel. The potential of this technology is absolutely enormous.”

The DoT asserts that the application of V2V technology will help drivers with:
• Blind spot warnings
• Forward collision warnings
• Sudden braking ahead warnings
• Do not pass warnings
• Intersection collision avoidance and movement assistance
• Approaching emergency vehicle warning
• Vehicle safety inspection
• Transit or emergency vehicle signal priority
• Electronic parking and toll payments
• Commercial vehicle clearance and safety inspections
• In-vehicle signing
• Rollover warning
• Traffic and travel condition data to improve traveler information and maintenance services

David Friedman, head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), commented that V2V will “prevent crashes in the first place” and ensure accidents are survivable.

Friedman also said that the federal government has not mandated that automakers install these devices.

During the next 3 months, automakers and the public will be allowed to voice their opinions and concerns to regulators while a draft of the new standards is being written.

This move toward interconnected vehicles and the use of the internet to ensure partial control over the cars will cause car manufacturers to “rethink how they design and construct cars because they will no longer be constructing cars to survive a crash, but building them to avoid a crash.”

Image credit:

About the author:

Susanne Posel Chief Editor, Investigative Journalist Radio Host: The Region 10 Report, Live Thursdays 1-3PM PST on American Freedom Radio.


Adam Kokesh gives a great speech


Adam Kokesh – Freedom is Inevitable

Recorded at LibertyFest West, February 11, 2012


An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the U.S. Congress



December 15, 2011 | By Parker Higgins and Peter Eckersley

An Open Letter From Internet Engineers to the U.S. Congress

Today, a group of 83 prominent Internet inventors and engineers sent an open letter to members of the United States Congress, stating their opposition to the SOPA and PIPA Internet blacklist bills that are under consideration in the House and Senate respectively.

We, the undersigned, have played various parts in building a network called the Internet. We wrote and debugged the software; we defined the standards and protocols that talk over that network. Many of us invented parts of it. We’re just a little proud of the social and economic benefits that our project, the Internet, has brought with it.

Last year, many of us wrote to you and your colleagues to warn about the proposed “COICA” copyright and censorship legislation. Today, we are writing again to reiterate our concerns about the SOPA and PIPA derivatives of last year’s bill, that are under consideration in the House and Senate. In many respects, these proposals are worse than the one we were alarmed to read last year.

If enacted, either of these bills will create an environment of tremendous fear and uncertainty for technological innovation, and seriously harm the credibility of the United States in its role as a steward of key Internet infrastructure. Regardless of recent amendments to SOPA, both bills will risk fragmenting the Internet’s global domain name system (DNS) and have other capricious technical consequences. In exchange for this, such legislation would engender censorship that will simultaneously be circumvented by deliberate infringers while hampering innocent parties’ right and ability to communicate and express themselves online.

All censorship schemes impact speech beyond the category they were intended to restrict, but these bills are particularly egregious in that regard because they cause entire domains to vanish from the Web, not just infringing pages or files. Worse, an incredible range of useful, law-abiding sites can be blacklisted under these proposals. In fact, it seems that this has already begun to happen under the nascent DHS/ICE seizures program.

Censorship of Internet infrastructure will inevitably cause network errors and security problems. This is true in China, Iran and other countries that censor the network today; it will be just as true of American censorship. It is also true regardless of whether censorship is implemented via the DNS, proxies, firewalls, or any other method. Types of network errors and insecurity that we wrestle with today will become more widespread, and will affect sites other than those blacklisted by the American government.

The current bills — SOPA explicitly and PIPA implicitly — also threaten engineers who build Internet systems or offer services that are not readily and automatically compliant with censorship actions by the U.S. government. When we designed the Internet the first time, our priorities were reliability, robustness and minimizing central points of failure or control. We are alarmed that Congress is so close to mandating censorship-compliance as a design requirement for new Internet innovations. This can only damage the security of the network, and give authoritarian governments more power over what their citizens can read and publish.

The US government has regularly claimed that it supports a free and open Internet, both domestically and abroad. We cannot have a free and open Internet unless its naming and routing systems sit above the political concerns and objectives of any one government or industry. To date, the leading role the US has played in this infrastructure has been fairly uncontroversial because America is seen as a trustworthy arbiter and a neutral bastion of free expression. If the US begins to use its central position in the network for censorship that advances its political and economic agenda, the consequences will be far-reaching and destructive.

Senators, Congressmen, we believe the Internet is too important and too valuable to be endangered in this way, and implore you to put these bills aside.



Go to Top