This is brief guidance for Auto Companies on Suitable Conduct when operating in our nations.
Cars are becoming increasingly tech savvy. Regardless, there needs to be reasonable conduct on those behind the administration and use of this technology.
I have expressed a preference that we deal with Auto companies from Asia just given their history of greater sensibility in that market.
Ill just put down a few points here that I think you will be able to make easy sense of.
Automobiles in the consumer transport market are sold to individuals for the purpose of personal transport. Getting themselves and families to destinations for the purposes of their own livelihoods or work commitments. The applications of consumer transport vehicles are quite simple and finite.
– Car companies with consent of car owner should be able to collect data for the use of things like technology improvement, safety improvement, road construction intelligence & probably a range of other applications that use anonymised aggregate data.
Given our definition of consumer transport vehicles, the use of Automobiles for
– Commercial Intelligence
– Governmental Intelligence
– Individual Surveillance
– Stalking and Harassment
– Delaying or diverting individuals on roads.
– Communicating messages or interfering in the conscious experience of Individuals.
All of these examples are completely unacceptable. This is something that I have seen in detail reported by individuals in the USA.
As a consequence of the companies I have seen involved in this kind of Conduct – the Tesla Corporation and Tesla Automobiles are completely prohibited from operating in Australia. They have ultimately failed in their ventures here. Soon I will be writing decrees on how all courts should deal with legal cases involving Tesla Automobiles and how all commercial insurance or accident related claims involving Tesla Automobiles should be treated.
Further to this touching on two other corporates:
– Uber: I don’t believe given my experiences that the Uber corporation is fit to operate in Australia. I believe that this business should be moved elsewhere to corporations that are not influenced by any historic Uber shareholders or senior directors. It should also be moved to applications or platforms that offer comparable security features to both passengers and drivers. This application I also believe should be moved to different nations who have historically demonstrated more maturity until we can see the USA has made progress.
Google: I have already stipulated that Google street cars are not being operated by people of a suitable moral fabric to allow them to operate in our nations. I would give similar warnings to all other nations on the risks of allowing these cars to operate. I would advise all nations to lean on the side of those who live within their borders to uphold defence rights against these automobiles.
The sum total of my experiences with US Based corporations use of technologies like GPS would direct me toward suggesting that nations impose a 25 year embargo on the USA’s use of remotely controllable GPS technologies in our nations. The risk of not doing so is that men, women and children may experience events such as consciousness harassment, stalking, public messaging and other potentially harmful activities. In some cases not even controlled by beings operating the vehicles, but remotely controlled and programmed by individuals with significant skill in the application of such technologies.
Some of the business opportunity in this Area may move north if Canada demonstrate that their business leaders are mature enough to operate such technologies internationally.
I think this is reasonable guidance and I think if you have a young family that you want to be able to walk our streets in a civil peaceful environment you would be well served to take up this cause also and bring forward these changes in our nations.