I can’t. I just can’t.
As it references the NTSA I think that this is a USA only issue.
We need to scrap the entire US government and start over.
Liquidation and composting would be more environmentally friendly than scrapping.
“I dont want a chinese car because it would just spy on me”
I only like it when the us government and completely unregulated corporations spy on me. It’s the American way
It’s 1984 and no one cares
Lately, whenever anyone draws the obvious parallels to 1984, posters seem to jump to say that Orwell had unsavoury beliefs and therefore it negates any correct thing he ever said.
It’s such a weird world where we decide someone must be 100% correct by today’s standards or else everything they ever said must be complete bunk.
All of our historical heroes were assholes by today’s standards, and we will be assholes in the eyes of our descendants.
How Orwellian.
With any luck, the giant tube worms and vent crabs living at the bottom of the ocean don’t even know I exist 😌
I do believe a lot of people care it’s just the ones that care have no power to do anything about it because the ones that have power are making too much money off of us not being able to do anything about it
Yea it’s unfortunate the Republicans are in power. They would have done something about this.
Most people are pathetic weaklings to do something, as I noticed, only americans can somehow resist this fascism along with some other peoples, and the rest of the world is ready to accept any dystopia, and believe in the fairy tales that are told to them, justifying themselves: what could I change?
Looks like I’ll need to start stockpiling old camrys and corollas in addition to hard drives, routers, motherboards, ram, dumb TVs, flip phones/whatever else they’re taking away this year.
You’d think more libertarian types would be more in favor of walkable cities, biking, and such.
Libertarians are in favor of maximum freedom for the maximally wealthy first and foremost. It’s an ideology promoted by the late Koch brothers.
It doesn’t take a genius to realize how this type of “freedom” shakes out for the less wealthy, and then further down, for the have-nots.
Basically libertarians are just undercover fascists.
Libertarians are people who turn a blind eye to externalities.
So… ICE will know both your location and face every time you get in your car? Yeah, I’m sure this won’t result in a genocide. /s
It won’t result in genocide but it will facilitate it.
I can’t wait to have to buy active countermeasures for this shit. /s
Bought a 2000 Honda Civic precisely because I don’t want to be spied upon.
Spank my ass cause everything else already does, so it makes my effort almost completely moot.
Exactly. You would have to somehow avoid cameras and ALPRs and leave your phone at home.
BTW. Leaving your phone at home can be seen as a suspicious action if you don’t do that normally.
Living in a capitalist hellscape is getting old.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Damn, glad i don’t own a car and will never buy one.
as someone who has dealt with over 20 years of pulling victims, alive and dead, from crashes caused by drunks (am firefighter not terrible driver…) I can say this won’t help shit. Just give more data (profit) to corporations and be used in rights violating ways.
It’s never actually about safety
Yup, same old “think of the children” excuse. It’s a carrot on a string so you don’t look at the stick.
Nothing is perfect, but the GSR2 for example has undoubtedly saved many lives. The problem isn’t with the technology, but that you don’t have any real privacy laws in the US.
There actually is a problem with the technology in this case. It sounds like what they’re proposing is eye tracking, which is not reliable with some eye shapes, eye makeup, dry eye, etc. and any markers they use to try to detect drunkenness would also trip for people with legitimate eye problems. Anecdotally, I once drove a Tesla and it locked me out of cruise control because the tracker thought I was falling asleep. Imagine if the car refused to start at all!
Like the EU is any better. Last I checked, France is passing the same kind of bullshit over and over, too.
Oh privacy died in the United States decades ago.
Nobody cares because we’re all fat, happy and comfortable.
Once rights are taken, violence is the only way to get them back. History is a wonderful teacher.
Why do you think this will not help?
because drunks find a way to make trouble. they’ll get around the tech glitches in the imperfect deployments. they’ll be alert enough to trick it. etc. they’ll drink while driving and the system won’t see that and the impairment won’t be recognized till its too late. (i’m focused on system concerns because I am also a software engineer and know the realities of large scale tech like this.)
to counter the tech I think the punishments for impaired driving (including cell phone use) should be harsh and without kindness, if you cause another person harm. Federally. With no return of your privileges once convicted.
While I am very much anti-government, if I am not going to be allowed to “follow up” with someone who drank and ran over a family member, etc… then we might as well push the lawmakers to do their jobs with the laws we already have. Not make new ones that are clearly there to profit tech and not save lives.
With no return of your privileges once convicted.
All that does is create the problem of driving unlicensed, so now you imprison nonviolent offenders (assuming they aren’t convicted of vehicular homicide type of charges).
I understand the sentiment, but the law of unintended consequences rears its ugly head here very quickly.
what’s nonviolent about having harmed someone while choosing to drive impaired?
also i 100% agree public transportation should be improved too.
but it’s disgusting how many times I see folks who have multiple accidents causing harm to others and are still allowed to drive.
It is readily proven that punishment does not work as a deterrent mechanism against criminal behavior, including drunk driving. Most crime is done on impulse, with no consideration of future consequences, regardless of how impactful those consequences may be.
The solution is proper public transit and urban design going back to focusing on pedestrian-centric instead of being car-centric. But that’s a much larger societal issue and unfortunately people don’t like the effort that it requires so they incessantly search for a quick fix “solution” that just puts a bandaid over the problem instead of solving it.
The law is doing its job, the law wasn’t created to help people, but to serve the interests of the ruling class. Naive to think these new policies aren’t the law doing what it was always intended to do.
while this is a set of fair points, my thoughts were not on punishment as a deterrent; it was on punishment to simply remove them from the road permanently.
i agree safety tech is good. seat belts to drowsy eye tech … all good. what I don’t see is the tech for drink driving specifically being tenable in a for profit nightmare world we live in. Subscription for the interlocking lapse? car is offline. Etc.
If they could make it offline, serviceable and calibrated as simply as an oil change, and buy once tech… cool.
Removing them from the road is a complicated issue with the stated issues of public transit access being limited. Limiting someone permanently from driving in some places might as well be a death sentence depending on their finances, which is also a big issue with punishment as a deterrent. The point of punishment is inherently to coerce people’s actions by way of threatening them with socially harmful consequences enforced by the state to deter them from acting in specific ways as dictated by law. Revoking their license and removing them from the road is the threat that is supposed to deter people from drunk driving. Yet, removing an offender does nothing to prevent more drunk driving from happening, thus not solving the issue at hand, as drunk driving is an impulse decision made in the moment (usually being a result of how convenient and accessible alternative means of traveling to the intended destination are) and not an action that is made out of habit or direct choice, though there are exceptions to this but those are also much larger issues usually, like mental health and such.
That’s all a much larger discussion, though, and let’s not digress.
The issue at hand is with privacy and data collection with cameras that are recording in modern cars with onboard computers connected to cellular networks via SIM cards. I would not put it past modern, capitalist driven companies to not utilize this for those ends under the guise of it being for “public safety”.
They can claim it is offline but so long as the vehicle computer that it is recording to is connected, which most modern ones are, then it is a privacy vulnerability risk that I absolutely believe modern companies will abuse; the most probable excuse being “analytics data collection for improving the device operations”. There are ways around it, like disabling the modem, but that puts unnecessary burden on the consumer which may void warranties and the like.
Last year I drove my parent’s car which is equipped with one of these cameras that determine if the driver is distracted or dozing. And I can say for certain that it works. I honestly wish that my car had this sort of a system.
I view this tech like a padlock. Sure some people will do whatever they can to get around it, but it keeps honest people honest. If it can reduce deaths on the road from drunk and tired drivers even by a little bit then isn’t that worth it?
I’m not sure what you mean by not being able to follow up… Driving drunk and killing someone is already punished harshly, and you can even follow up civilly; it’s called a wrongful death suit.
It doesn’t work on everyone. These systems have trouble with certain eye shapes, eye makeup, etc.
I think the NHTSA is more looking at detecting alcohol on the driver’s breath passively. But yes, there will always be cases where technology does not work optimally.
Last year I drove my parent’s car which is equipped with one of these cameras that determine if the driver is distracted or dozing. And I can say for certain that it works.
I rented two different modern (2015-2016) Mercedes SUVs. They both had systems that detected tired/inattentive driving. I was neither but after several hours on the road both vehicles would alert that it was time to take a break with a nice little coffee icon. I was conversing with a passenger, driving fine, not wandering between lanes/etc… The first time I kind of doubted myself but subsequent notifications both the passenger and myself were agreeing that we had no idea what it was upset about.
The newer car had another sensor that would get upset if your grip on the steering wheel got too light. That was kind of neat to see how much leeway it’d give you before it got antsy.
Probably because you were driving for a few hours. That makes sense. You may not feel it but driving is an active task that takes more effort than just sitting in a chair.
I would much rather have this system have false positives rather than not have it at all.
Honest people don’t need the government to spy on them to not drive drunk though?
What about their proposed solution requires any of this data to leave the vehicle?
The law says nothing about keeping the data in the vehicle, so it will 100% be sent outside the vehicle. Most modern cars already transmit your data so why would they change anything?
You are right. Because the law says nothing about the requirements. They haven’t decided on them yet. Come back when they propose something.
I am not willing to trade a modicum of safety for one of the greatest privacy and ownership violations of all time.
How about limiting the insanely bright headlights first?
You can do that yourself, those insanely bright headlights are just LED lights. The old halogen bulbs have a warmer light and are less blinding. I agree that LED bulbs should be illegal because they’re dangerous, but it has nothing to do with cars being newer or older, its the bulbs themselves.
The people that are smart enough to adjust their headlights aren’t the problem. The majority of people aren’t and they drive with those stadium lights everywhere.
Which is why I said they should be illegal. No idea why I’m being downvoted for telling the truth but whatever…
Those fuckers of all types are mounted 4 plus feet off the damn ground, there is zero adjustment you or anyone can make to stop them blinding me because THEY ARE ABOVE MY WHOLE ASS CAR!
Are you saying I can break every single vehicle’s headlights as they pass by and blind me? Because that doesn’t sound like a feasible solution to the problem as it stands
Of course it is just the headlights but they’ve become more commonplace. I don’t remember them being as ubiquitous as they are now. The newer LED ones are the worst because they aren’t dispersed and are like pinpoint sources.
Is it the bright headlights or the abundance of trucks raised so high that the headlights beam directly into your eyeballs…
Both. It’s both.
Properly adjusted headlights and people driving the appropriate following distance behind you should never have glaringly bright lights. Sadly neither is true very often. I’ve seen headlights out of whack straight from the factory. Headlights trend downward but people tailgating the shit out of you puts you in the beam path. Yes, height differences obviously play a role here.
I have a Miata, nearly anything on the road can blind me cause my head is only about ~3.5 feet(~1m) off the ground. The entire car is only about 4 feet(~1.2m) tall.
To anybody that lifted their vehicle truck or otherwise…did the thought of adjusting your headlights even cross your mind? I’m guessing not.
I’m also going to toss this out there…for the love of God do not put led bulbs in halogen light fixtures. I don’t care if they say they ‘mimic’ the halogen beam pattern…they don’t. You’re blinding everyone on the damn road just stop please, I beg you. (This is going to be the controversial piece that people respond to….yes, I know of a few bulbs that do okay at this but they’re expensive. People are buying the $20 ones on Amazon, and they suck at it. So my blanket statement is just don’t…please just don’t).
