• blazera
    link
    fedilink
    491 year ago

    Even ignoring the privacy problems, and the many technical problems this would run into with false positives and faulty systems, this approach to the problem of drunk driving is misguided.

    The US is one of the worst in the world for drunk driving, both in DUI rates, and how much blood alcohol is considered to be a DUI. Other countries are doing things way better than us, and a kill switch isnt their solution. We have shit like parking minimums for bars, and an abyssmal public transit infrastructure. Drunk driving is designed into our infrastructure. Even trying to address DUI convictions after the fact is discouraged here, because taking away someones ability to drive means taking away their functioning in American society.

    • Uranium3006
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      America is a failed state that piles cops on top of cops to try and patch it’s self inflicted systemic dysfunctions rather than try to solve them

  • squiblet
    link
    fedilink
    351 year ago

    The “law enforcement wouldn’t have access” part some groups focused on is a bit of a red herring. One, I don’t really believe it. But two, law enforcement would be sure to notice someone whose car wouldn’t drive over 15 mph all of a sudden or was disabled on the side of a road.

    I could also picture this leading to so many different unsafe situations. Leaving a bad area of town at night after a show? Great, the system kicks in and disables your car leaving you stranded and at risk of robbery or kidnapping or assault whether you stay with your car or try to seek another ride. Driving home to a rural area in freezing weather with no cell service? Well, the system thinks you’re impaired so it disabled your car, leaving you at risk of hypothermia, sorry. Stressed because you’re late to a job interview? Sorry, the system determined you are driving in safely and disabled your car, so guess you won’t make it. It’s solidly dystopian.

    • @evranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Rural Canadian here. We get everything mandated in the USA because it’s not worth making Canadian models. Then we have to disable it.

      This would be the absolute first thing to go on any vehicle purchased. We do DEF/DPF/SCR delete, traction control/stabilitrak delete just to make sure our vehicles are reliable and perform as expected in Arctic conditions.

      Note that EGR delete isn’t on the list as EGR actually improves cruise efficiency while cutting emissions… And PCV delete is idiotic, I’ve added PCV to old vehicles that didn’t have it. It’s not like we just hate the environment or something.

      The last thing we want is a system that could intentionally make the truck eat shit while we’re smashing snowdrifts with the bumper and trying to get home in a storm. It could literally kill us

  • originalucifer
    link
    fedilink
    331 year ago

    we already cant trust authority with things like guns, why the fuck should we let them do this?

    this would be just another tool to be abused by the cowards that join these groups and call themselves ‘officers’.

    • It’s also another potential attack vector for hackers to use. Imagine hackers getting control of the system (or simply finding whatever standardized backdoor the companies have been forced to include) and being able to shut down an entire city over a weekend.

    • JokeDeity
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      We can’t trust authorities with guns? You mean like in the sense that they do absolutely nothing about the rampancy of them in America?

      • originalucifer
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        hahah what the actual fuck are you talkin about. you certainly arent referring to me. at no point did i disregard regulation or call for it.

        you must be OLD and Uneducated because you cant seem to slow your Roll.

      • @PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        They’re totally right. I drive slowly on surface streets and am insanely careful around kids, pets and motorcyclists. Wanting to have control of my vehicle has nothing to do with having a good time. It has to do with government invasion of my life.

        Also, I’m almost to mid life crisis age.

      • Unaware7013
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Lol, you’re unbelievable naive if you think this wouldn’t be abused by the powers that be or subverted by hackers.

  • graycube
    link
    fedilink
    22
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It seems like this bill assumes 1 driver per car and 1 car per driver. There are plenty of folks who share a car, and plenty of folks who own more than one. Also would the sensor know if you are driving on an icy road or with low visibility due to dense fog? Would it suddenly shut you car off in the middle of winter and leave you to freeze to death?

    • Tygr
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      Are you new to politics? This crap has gone on for decades.

  • magnetosphere
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    This stock photo is hilariously bad. The fact that’s it’s sorta, kinda related just makes it worse, not better.

      • magnetosphere
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        It doesn’t go with the article. It looks like someone having ordinary car trouble and calling a tow truck or something.

        By itself, the photo is, technically, fine (it’s in focus, the lighting is decent, etc)

    • Bipta
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ban freedom. Ban independence. Put all faith in your increasingly hostile government.

      You think us uncaring. We think you a fool.


      The legislation then goes on to define the technology as a computer system that can “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle” and can “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected” (emphasis added).

      Yup, this is fine.

    • totallynotaspy
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So from another comment:

      I could also picture this leading to so many different unsafe situations. Leaving a bad area of town at night after a show? Great, the system kicks in and disables your car leaving you stranded and at risk of robbery or kidnapping or assault whether you stay with your car or try to seek another ride. Driving home to a rural area in freezing weather with no cell service? Well, the system thinks you’re impaired so it disabled your car, leaving you at risk of hypothermia, sorry. Stressed because you’re late to a job interview? Sorry, the system determined you are driving in safely and disabled your car, so guess you won’t make it. It’s solidly dystopian. !squiblet

      As anyone who has ever had to have an interlock in their car can tell you, the Police give 0 fucks if the interlock messes up on its own giving an “abnormality” then they’re dragging you to court and/or jail while they figure it out.

      Any system that can be used to monitor citizens will be, ex. the NSA and the revelations that caused an American hero to have to hide in a literal dictatorial country. You can’t trust the government or law enforcement with any information. PERIOD.

    • BrikoXOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      While your points are valid, it ignores the issue it would create. Once a feature exists, everyone has access to it.

    • @froh42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      What about some decent driver’s education and not letting kids drive cars? Just like the rest of the civilized world handles it?