Karl on Cars - Should OnStar be turning your engine off?

Should OnStar be turning your engine off?

I remember when OnStar first hit the market. The advertisements (they had a Batman theme back then) showed how OnStar could help drivers find a local business or the closest ATM. I tried it once in my own neighborhood in a Cadillac test vehicle. This was back around 2001, and I dutifully obeyed the driving instuctions as the OnStar operator directed me right past my local bank -- and ATM -- (about 8 blocks from my house) and on to an ATM about three miles away. I haven't used OnStar for directions since, but I'm willing to believe it's more accurate these days.

Other OnStar selling points include airbag deployment notification, remote door unlocking and even on-the-fly engine diagnostics. All of these features are interesting, but they also follow a common theme -- having somebody, somewhere, know as much or more about your vehicle than you do. Now comes the latest in OnStar "features" -- remote engine shut down. If you follow this link you can learn more and even see a video (crash footage included), but suffice to say OnStar can now disable your engine at will.

This isn't really news, as I've always assumed the same technology that can track your location, unlock your doors and analyze your engine oil's particulate count can probably completely shut your vehicle down as well. Now I know it can, and if your behavior has been dubbed dangerous, OnStar will.

We could go into a big, laborious discussion of traffic safety and greater good and George Orwell, but let's keep it simple. If your vehicle has OnStar it can technically be shut down by someone else at any time -- whether you want it to be or not. Sometimes you may want your vehicle shut down (i.e. it's just been stolen), sometimes you may not want it to be shut down (your son has just had an allergic reaction to peanuts and you're rushing to the emergency room). The point is, you won't be the only one making that decision anymore.

Expanding on the example I just offered, let's say your son has a peanut allergy. Now let's say you're driving to visit friends across town, and he's in the back seat enjoying Shrek on the rear entertainment system. Suddenly you hear him coughing and choking. You look back to see him turning red, grasping his throat and dropping a candy bar that apparently had nuts in it, but nobody noticed until now. The wife goes for the epinephrine shot you always carry while you start driving toward the local hospital. You stop briefly while the wife administers the shot, and although your son's condition stops deteriorating he's still having trouble breathing. So you continue on toward the hospital, and at this point speed limits aren't your primary concern (though you're doing everything you can to maintain "safe" driving practices).

Now a police car pulls behind you but you're only a few blocks from the hospital. You slow a bit but decide the situation is justified to keep going. You can explain everything to the officer in the emergency driveway while your wife takes your son inside. But 30 seconds after the police car starts following you with its lights on (and now only two blocks from the hospital) you notice your car slowing down -- despite how much throttle you apply. And your son's breathing is getting more ragged and belabored...

A far fetched situation? Probably.

Hmm, what if your wife calls on your drive home and says someone is breaking into the house? What if some whackjob is having a roadrage tantrum and trying to run into you? What if...

Ah, maybe I'm just a paranoid freak. I'm sure nothing but good can come from this technology.

Forget I mentioned it.

Posted by Karl Oct 12, 2007 6:00 am

Permalink

Categories: Traffic Safety | Safety Systems

Comments

opfreak - Oct 13, 2007 6:44 am (#37 Total: 56)

lam5, your not opening your mind up.

Yes right now its an option. But people will start using your argument for mandateing it.

Just like seat belts, air bags, side air bags. stablity control, tire pressure monitors. ETC.

People like you will go before congress and say, 'it saved this one life', Everyone should have it, then it will save 3000 lives a year.

and boom in 2011 the DOT or congress manadates that all cars come with the ability to have their speed controlled.

Theres a HUGE different from getting directions from someone. And getting your car turned off by someone.

Sorry your argument, (red herring?) is just false.

mnorm1 - Oct 13, 2007 8:36 am (#38 Total: 56)

"It has saved my child's life more than once when he had an allergic reaction while we were out to eat on a side of town we were not familiar with. "

If that's true you need more than onstar

lam5 - Oct 13, 2007 5:28 pm (#39 Total: 56)

It is true, and ONSTAR is the best for OUR family. When you compare 911 to ONSTAR, 911 is more time consuming, they don't know your location and can't give you directions or call an ambulance if you are lost, we can't speak to the emergency room personel, etc. ONSTAR is such a comfort as we know we can go anywhere and get to an emergency room quickly and efficiently in a dire situation. It is also tremendously comforting to have someone on the line when you have an emergency occuring. We no longer travel by plane, we drive so we can have this piece of mind. This is OUR life and ONSTAR is truly a life saver.
If that's true you need more than onstar-mnorm, please let me know what out there is better than ONSTAR. opfreak, ONSTAR is great for our situation, I recently bought a car for my teenager, my only requirement was ONSTAR. I love the feature, I have used the emergency component so many times, I don't want to not have it in the car. Also, the hands free phone is much safer for a teenager. I strongly feel the benefit of ONSTAR outweighs your paranoia over the government restricting or controlling your driving. My question to you both, have you ever even used it?

SubyTrojan - Oct 13, 2007 5:43 pm (#40 Total: 56)

Santa Monica, CA, USA

Just in case people don't know what some of the comments above are about, Edmunds is sponsoring a contest where the winner will come out to Southern California to drive the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu, 2008 Honda Accord, and 2008 Toyota Camry.

http://www.edmunds.com/consumercomparisontest.html

If you win, I'd like to meet you while you're visiting the Edmunds office! :o)

blueguydotcom - Oct 13, 2007 6:03 pm (#41 Total: 56)

San Diego CA

It has saved my child's life more than once when he had an allergic reaction while we were out to eat on a side of town we were not familiar with

My sister has an unusual and life-threatening food allergy and is 39. She's somehow made it her whole life without onstar. She carries her shot with her at all times but more importantly, she makes inquiries everywhere she eats. My one food allergy - olives/olive oil - is rare in the foods I eat, yet I too take the time to make inquiries and/or opt for foods that are obviously safe. I hope this isn't someone's argument for needing OnStar, because if it is...wow...just wow.

moparbad - Oct 13, 2007 7:14 pm (#42 Total: 56)

USA

Wow...just wow...

That was my reaction to "Big Brother" arguments against new Onstar capabilities.

lam5 - Oct 13, 2007 7:28 pm (#43 Total: 56)

Wow...just wow...
Not needing ONSTAR, appreciating ONSTAR. I also like getting information regarding traffic and weather in my area when traveling through onstar advisor.

If you feel the government will eventually use a similar system to shut down your car, know where you are, and control your speed, the group behind that is the insurance companies. Have you disabled your little black box as well? Do you use disposable cell phones so you can't be tracked?

And Blue guy, it's not a shot, its an Epipen. Have you ever heard of cross contamination?

blueguydotcom - Oct 13, 2007 11:11 pm (#44 Total: 56)

San Diego CA

And Blue guy, it's not a shot, its an Epipen. Have you ever heard of cross contamination?

Epipen is a shot. Good grief...

"Remove the pen from the thigh; be careful with the needle that will now be projecting from the EpiPen when you dispose of the device."
http://www.allergycapital.com.au/Pages/epipen.html

That's a shot. You can dress it up in a cylinder and call it a pen but the reality is that it's a needle used to inject epinephrine.

A simple navi system can provide traffic and weather. Heck, a Blackberry can do all of that too and it won't control your car in any fashion. Some things do not need to be tied into each other: navigation and your car at the top of the list.

To each his own, guys. Your blackberry with GPS and 3G can't do jack to your car. OnStar's a bad idea that costs money monthly and has very limited functionality for life. There's a reason GM has trouble keeping subscribers: the value proposition isn't there. 60% renewal after the first year is hardly noteworthy.

http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/audio/articles/120715/article.html

1487 - Oct 14, 2007 5:50 am (#45 Total: 56)

Philadelphia PA United States of America

subytrojan:

you are an edmunds staffer? Or do you just live in the area?

jr1m90 - Oct 14, 2007 10:12 am (#46 Total: 56)

Pennsylvania, United States of America

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Ben Franklin

It's a simple concept really, the government has no right to watch where, how, or how fast I drive. Of, course, critics claim, "but if you're not doing anything illegal, why should you care?" Well, first off, I am doing illegal things when I drive (I'll admit it, I drive to the maximum safe limit of the road. Oh perish the thought, my state representatives don't always know what's best for me!). Second, it's a privacy issue that has nothing to do with the government at all.

Now, ONSTAR has its benefits, directions being one of them. But, there is a difference between activating the system yourself (actually pushing the button) and having the system activate itself (or be activated remotely without your consent). A big difference. No one, not ONSTAR, GM, the police, President Bush, or any one else, should be able to control my car. The only way that ONSTAR should be able to track you is if you voluntarily push that little blue button and initiate contact with them, they should not be constantly monitoring you (and then calling when they 'think' something has gone wrong, such as when Edmunds does slalom tests).

z479 - Oct 14, 2007 10:14 am (#47 Total: 56)

I saw the contest the first day it was posted on Edmunds. The sad part is that I am 18 and shortly after reading the first paragraph, I read that you have to be 21 :( There went my dream of being an auto journalist and going to beautiful CA. If there were any way I could be chosen for this, or some type of internship at Edmunds, it would truly make my life's goal come true. I read Karl's articles and every other Edmunds article every day. I talk to all of my friends and professors about your site and people see how I have a real passion for what Edmunds does. I would pay to come to CA and visit your offices, and stay as an intern/assistant when I have break. It would definitely help me have some real experience in what I love to do while I work on my major in Mechanical Engineering and minor in Journalism. My email is zeid479@gmail.com, I feel like a kid on Christmas Eve right now...Please get back to me.

SubyTrojan - Oct 14, 2007 3:48 pm (#48 Total: 56)

Santa Monica, CA, USA

1487, I work for Edmunds, but not in the Editorial department.

editor_karl - Oct 14, 2007 9:54 pm (#49 Total: 56)

L.A. CA United States of America

Not to fuel the fire, but you guys all do realize that, IN THEORY, OnStar can activate that hands-free microphone whenever it wants and hear everything going on in the car. I'm sure they don't ever do that and wouldn't ever do that...just like they'd never cut your engine's power against your will...unless circumstances required such extreme action...

Like when we do slalom testing and OnStar calls to see if there's been an accident.

opfreak - Oct 15, 2007 5:13 am (#50 Total: 56)

And Karl just gave us more evidence. And this is stuff we know about. How much Aren't they telling us.

So now when you push the car to its limits, thats considered an 'extreme' event and onstar calls? Wow.

mnorm1 - Oct 15, 2007 2:01 pm (#51 Total: 56)

Coming in 2009:
Stolen Vehicle Slowdown
"OnStar then sends a remote signal to the vehicle that interacts with the Powertrain system to reduce engine power which will slow the vehicle down gradually.
Research has shown that 95 percent of OnStar subscribers want the Stolen Vehicle Slowdown service available on their cars and trucks. OnStar subscribers have the choice to opt-out of the Stolen Vehicle Slowdown service at any time by contacting OnStar if they prefer not to have this capability on their vehicle."
Quotes from the onstar website.

billt9 - Oct 15, 2007 4:03 pm (#52 Total: 56)

In theory, after you've gone to sleep, at 2:00 am in the morning, OnStar can drive the car back to the factory.
That way, GM can keep reselling the same cars over and over. OnStar will also self paint the car a new color.
Who stole it? Nobody. The car just disappeared.

Smart business plan, GM.

editor_karl - Oct 15, 2007 4:20 pm (#53 Total: 56)

L.A. CA United States of America

(Note: the following works best if you can "hear" it in a Troy McClure voice)

It's 2008's newest high-tech prank!

Sure, you could pull the old tack on the chair bit, but isn't it more fun to call from a pay phone and report your "friend's" car stolen? The next thing he knows he's driving down the road when his vehicle loses power, stranding him until the cops show up.

Bonus points if you can make the call when he's shuttling his in-laws to the airport or making his way to a that big, important meeting.

Ah, can't you just see the hilarity now?!

Note: Also works for scorned girfriends and road raged commuters who are able to get make, model and license number as you slog through rush hour.

1487 - Oct 15, 2007 5:05 pm (#54 Total: 56)

Philadelphia PA United States of America

"Like when we do slalom testing and OnStar calls to see if there's been an accident."

that is most likely due to the stability system being activated. I dont think thats quite the same as cutting engine power at will. For most people it's pretty hard to activate the stability system under normal circumstances. My brother tried to drive aggressively enough to activate his and he could not do so.

I'm not quite sure how Onstar could listen to you without there being a two way connection in which you can hear them, You think they are pressing the mute button while eaves dropping on you while driving?

Even if they could, what would be the point? I guess Onstar employees could sit around waiting for you to yell out your social security # or credit card number out loud while in traffic because you know, people do that all the time.

In today's world cars are all about overkill, especially when it comes to safety. Onstar is no worse than cars that decide to brake for you or cars that can park for you or cars that allow you to use nav only when in park. I heard MB is working on a system in which the car can almost drive itself- sort of an evolution of automatic cruise control. I dont think anyone does the excessive saftey thing like the Germans and they arent done yet. The thing about Onstar is that you can drop it after a year and be done with it.

perhaps we should ask people who have lived with the service about their experiences instead of speculating about spying and KITT type automation where the car does things you didnt command it to do.

Its amazing that Onstar has been getting into all this abuse of privacy stuff without anyone finding out or filing a lawsuit.

blueguydotcom - Oct 19, 2007 8:51 am (#55 Total: 56)

San Diego CA

For most people it's pretty hard to activate the stability system under normal circumstances. My brother tried to drive aggressively enough to activate his and he could not do so.

Wow, your brother must either be mario andretti or he's afraid to actually push his car.

I'm not quite sure how Onstar could listen to you without there being a two way connection in which you can hear them, You think they are pressing the mute button while eaves dropping on you while driving?

Don't you hit the mute button when you call into a conference call and you hear the other team babbling away? It's been common at every company I've worked for.

Its amazing that Onstar has been getting into all this abuse of privacy stuff without anyone finding out or filing a lawsuit.

Or the sheeple that buy OnStar cars want the stuff. Those of us that fear it, we wouldn't buy it...

1487 - Oct 24, 2007 12:56 pm (#56 Total: 56)

Philadelphia PA United States of America

"Wow, your brother must either be mario andretti or he's afraid to actually push his car. "

you tell him that. I know that he's not but then again I cant be surprised that you have all the answers and know more about what he's afraid to do than I would.

"Don't you hit the mute button when you call into a conference call and you hear the other team babbling away? It's been common at every company I've worked for. "

Just tell me why any of this would ever appeal to anyone if it is possible. You need a two way connection to hit a mute button and listen in. If you have not connected with an Onstar adviser how the hell could they listen to your conversation in the car?

"Or the sheeple that buy OnStar cars want the stuff. Those of us that fear it, we wouldn't buy it..."

We know you wouldnt buy a car with Onstar because of who makes the car. Onstar wasnt even standard on most GM vehicles until very recently so its not like you couldnt get a car without it. Since you have all the answers one would think you would know that. One thing's for sure, you are certainly more intelligent and savvy than the idiots who would buy something with Onstar. Interestingly enough Lexus, MB and others have the same technology. Lexus and Acura used Onstar under license but with different names. Guess those people are sheep too.