The coming end of internet freedom

[Annoyed]

The carrier -- you mean the guy wrapped around a tree and the cyclist dead on the road?

No, the cellular data or telephone carrier.
And bicyclists belong over in the bonehead thread. I'm sorry, but riding one of those things in even a suburban area is suicidal. Out in the boonies, where there aren't any cars on the road, fine.
But in town? You can pass every imaginable law you want, but at the end of the day, 2000 Lbs (low end of automobile weight) knocks 200Lbs into the next life every time.

[Gatefan1976]

Meanwhile, in the People's Republic of New York....

Bill: Let cops check phones after a crash
http://www.pressconnects.com/story/n...rash/82669698/

What a crock. If they really wanted to just check for usage, they can get a warrant and get the carriers' records.

So, the idea is, if you get in an accident, they want to be able to search your phone.

No, the idea is, they want to know if you were using the phone as it could be a "contributing factor" in the crash.

[Gatefan1976]

No, the cellular data or telephone carrier.
And bicyclists belong over in the bonehead thread. I'm sorry, but riding one of those things in even a suburban area is suicidal. Out in the boonies, where there aren't any cars on the road, fine.
But in town? You can pass every imaginable law you want, but at the end of the day, 2000 Lbs (low end of automobile weight) knocks 200Lbs into the next life every time.

So, when the person driving 20,000 lbs of truck wipes you out because you are and idiot in your car, the same argument applies?
Might makes right?

[Gatefan1976]

Such laws are already in place over here... so if you don't want to be nominated for a Darwin Award do not text and drive. Or check twitter/facebook/instagram... or use the phone.

Hands' free or bluetooth enabled. Eyes should be on the road.

Stop making common sense, you know that personal responsibility is what "other people" have to have, if affect you, it's a right!!

[Womble]

Meanwhile, in the People's Republic of New York....

Bill: Let cops check phones after a crash
http://www.pressconnects.com/story/n...rash/82669698/

What a crock. If they really wanted to just check for usage, they can get a warrant and get the carriers' records.

So, the idea is, if you get in an accident, they want to be able to search your phone.

Carriers' records will not tell you what the person were doing on their phone beyond whom they called or texted and when. They won't tell you if they were checking Facebook or sending a Whatsapp message.


There's been some reports that Apple have assisted the police in the past to extract data from iPhones. I've looked into it and apparently it's half-true. Apple have assisted law enforcement in extracting user files from iPhones running iOS7, the one before encryption was introduced. With iOS 7, Apple had the capability to extract data from Iphones (still, only from Apple apps and not third-party apps), so they could be legitimately compelled to use it. With iOS 8 and 9, Apple is being asked to manufacture a piece of custom software for the purpose of accessing data on a specific device (NOT, as some journalists claimed, to redesign iOS itself to allow brute force breaching).

[SoulReaver]

Such laws are already in place over here...

but do they apply to everyone?
(rhetorical question tbh)

Hands' free

won't change anything

[Falcon Horus]

No, the cellular data or telephone carrier.

Ah...

but do they apply to everyone?
(rhetorical question tbh)

Rhetorical answer = yes.

[Annoyed]

No, the idea is, they want to know if you were using the phone as it could be a "contributing factor" in the crash.

I am nearly certain that DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) can tell exactly what data was being sent at what time; if the data being used is for Facebook or some such, or if it's automatic activity such as weather, GPS or whatever else getting updated in the background, without the phone being "in use".

So the question goes back to "why do they want the authority to search the phone, they already have access to data regarding the phones usage at the time of the crash."

[Annoyed]

So, when the person driving 20,000 lbs of truck wipes you out because you are and idiot in your car, the same argument applies?
Might makes right?

The same argument does indeed apply. An 80,000 Lb Semi (Gross Vehicle Weight limit in most cases) will indeed knock my 5000 Lb SUV into the next timezone.

But there are a lot fewer trucks than there are cars, and the vast majority of those drivers are trained professionals whose livelihood depends upon their good behavior behind the wheel.

In comparison, there are several orders of magnitude more cars on the road, and a large percentage of these drivers don't really know how to drive and shouldn't be on the roads period, but thanks to lax licensing requirements, anyone with a pulse can get a license.

The bicyclists are in far greater danger from these drivers than I am from heavy trucks.

[aretood2]

The same argument does indeed apply. An 80,000 Lb Semi (Gross Vehicle Weight limit in most cases) will indeed knock my 5000 Lb SUV into the next timezone.

But there are a lot fewer trucks than there are cars, and the vast majority of those drivers are trained professionals whose livelihood depends upon their good behavior behind the wheel.

In comparison, there are several orders of magnitude more cars on the road, and a large percentage of these drivers don't really know how to drive and shouldn't be on the roads period, but thanks to lax licensing requirements, anyone with a pulse can get a license.

The bicyclists are in far greater danger from these drivers than I am from heavy trucks.

Do you get stuck behind bike riders in your commute? To be honest, they should also make an effort to move and allow cars to drive by without fear of ramming into incoming traffic. I mean, car drivers are going places they need to be...bike riders are having fun...who should have priority here?

But beyond that, I don't have a problem with them being on the road.

[Starsaber]

Do you get stuck behind bike riders in your commute? To be honest, they should also make an effort to move and allow cars to drive by without fear of ramming into incoming traffic. I mean, car drivers are going places they need to be...bike riders are having fun...who should have priority here?

But beyond that, I don't have a problem with them being on the road.

Bike riders could be going places they need to be too, especially younger ones who can't drive yet.

At least on major roads around here there's a bike lane, so that mitigates some of the problems.

[aretood2]

Not where I am from. Bike riders are mostly recreational or for exercise, and there are adequate areas for both.

[Falcon Horus]

Over here, we have bike highways as we have a large group of commuters cycling to work and/or school.

[Womble]

Do you get stuck behind bike riders in your commute? To be honest, they should also make an effort to move and allow cars to drive by without fear of ramming into incoming traffic. I mean, car drivers are going places they need to be...bike riders are having fun...who should have priority here?

As someone who commutes to work by bicycle, I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I would go as far as to say that in large cities, cars should be restricted in favor of bicycles and electrical scooters.

I have repeatedly confirmed that I get to work faster by bicycle than by taxi.

[Ian-S]

If you cyclists want priority then you need to start contributing to the road upkeep like us pesky car drivers have to (this is only relevant to the UK where car owners pay road tax but cyclists don't).

Anyway this is all a moot point, internet freedom will be a thing of the past now thanks to Panamagate.