4 ms·

Presumably, this will also allow law enforcement to flip the kill switch too. Virtually end all car chases. (Within say 15 - 20 years when a majority of cars wi

Presumably, this will also allow law enforcement to flip the kill switch too. Virtually end all car chases. (Within say 15 - 20 years when a majority of cars will have this feature). Either by being virtually near the car in question to transmit the signal, or even via the internet (if supplied with a network connection) Now this can be hacked as all things can. Car jackings, robbery, prevent a victim from escaping. I would prefer a car without this feature,. Drunk driving is a major issue that is not yet dealt with in an efficient enough manner. I would prefer that the change is to build a BAC measurer into every car. This is a technology that we have today, it is being used and it is efficient enough that it continues to be used. It has some obvious weaknesses I guess someone else could blow clean for you and off you go. This new, high-tech, detect your BAC by inspecting your driving is prone to have issues as well and more of them until the technology matures.

ovi256 5y ago
> I would prefer a car without this feature,. So would criminals, at least those professional enough to plan ahead. So I expect pre-kill switch vehicles to be used exclusively by such criminals.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  > I expect pre-kill switch vehicles to be used Expect them to be used by people who consider a kill-switch on their car unacceptable, on the basis of the valid reasons you will be able to find scattered in this page. Also: the logic! : "C prefer W, so only C will..." : what was that?!
  - ovi256 5y ago
    I never wanted to imply only criminals would use such cars. Of course there are valid reasons to prefer them. I think I'd prefer them myself. I was thinking about the increased demand on used pre-kill switch cars.
- borski 5y ago
  If crossing the street when the walk signal isn’t showing but there are no cars for miles makes me a criminal, so be it. I expect anyone who rationally believes that this opens up a whole slew of dangers on the road, from security concerns to self-incrimination to, quite simply, bugs would be the ones to use pre-kill switch vehicles.
- ovi256 5y ago
  I would like to clarify my comment: The obvious vulnerability of a remote kill switch would also push criminals, at least those professional enough to plan ahead, to use them. Not implying that only criminals would use them. There are many valid reasons to prefer them.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Stop assuming everyone is a criminal. Don't give government this level of control over your life or you become China with a Social Credit Score. We already have a financial credit score and we know how much that is already abused. Screw Big Brother.
rascul 5y ago
> I would prefer that the change is to build a BAC measurer into every car. This is a technology that we have today, it is being used and it is efficient enough that it continues to be used. There are problems. Having to do a breath test in the middle of your drive. Can't drive after eating or brushing teeth. No mints or chewing gum while driving. Must be very careful with medications. Regular calibration. Vehicle service might require a certified technician to verify the device isn't tampered with. False positive means you can't get to work on time. Sharing a vehicle is much more difficult. This is a very high burden to put on the average driver who has done nothing to deserve it.
DonHopkins 5y ago
Performance or Impairment Testing is a much better alternative to Drug Testing for alcohol or heroin or PCP or being sleepy or having just broken up with your girlfriend or anything else that might cause a crash: require the driver to play a video game that proves they have good reflexes and quick reaction time. This is not a new idea: Performance Tests vs. Drug Tests. Dec. 25, 1990: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-12-25-fi-7155-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-12-25-fi-7155-s... >The Factor 1000 test is simple and takes only about 30 seconds. It consists of a software program on a personal computer equipped with a special keyboard and a control knob. >Before starting on a job, the worker uses the knob to try to keep a swaying pointer in the center of the screen. The pointer swings faster and faster from left to right, and the test ends when the pointer swings too far, as it inevitably does. Workers pass if they can keep it relatively steady long enough to show that they are up to their own, predetermined standard. >The computerized hand-eye coordination test indicates whether a person is too impaired to work for any reason--drugs, alcohol or even because of a sleepless night. The Advantages of Impairment Testing over Drug Testing to Improve Workplace Safety: https://predictivesafety.com/the-advantages-of-impairment-testing-over-drug-testing-to-improve-workplace-safety/ https://predictivesafety.com/the-advantages-of-impairment-te... >Since President Regan’s mandate for drug testing Federal employees in 1988, many private sector employers followed suit, and continue to follow suit, by testing their employees for drug use, especially in safety-sensitive industries like construction and manufacturing, under the impression that drug testing helps create and maintain a safe workplace (1). However, more and more employers are beginning to recognize the limitations and detriments of drug testing as a tool for enhancing workplace safety, understanding that drug testing is not a preventative safety measure if it can be considered a safety measure at all. [...] >Cultural changes notwithstanding, some experts have been advocating in favor of impairment testing over drug testing for many years because drug testing is not a preventative measure, as described above. A 2010 report by the National Workrights Institute put it succinctly: >Impairment testing is the practice of determining which workers in safety sensitive positions put themselves and others at risk by directly measuring workers’ current fitness for duty. Urine testing, in contrast, attempts to determine which workers have used specific substances known to cause impairment in the relatively recent past. (10)
gremloni 5y ago
No. I think we should just accept the deaths and losses from drunk driving and thefts as long as mitigation involves universal control over items I own. Not to mention, you’ll probably just end up buying humid air blowers that get past this block.

ovi256 5y ago

> I would prefer a car without this feature,. So would criminals, at least those professional enough to plan ahead. So I expect pre-kill switch vehicles to be used exclusively by such criminals.

mdp2021 5y ago
> I expect pre-kill switch vehicles to be used Expect them to be used by people who consider a kill-switch on their car unacceptable, on the basis of the valid reasons you will be able to find scattered in this page. Also: the logic! : "C prefer W, so only C will..." : what was that?!
- ovi256 5y ago
  I never wanted to imply only criminals would use such cars. Of course there are valid reasons to prefer them. I think I'd prefer them myself. I was thinking about the increased demand on used pre-kill switch cars.
borski 5y ago
If crossing the street when the walk signal isn’t showing but there are no cars for miles makes me a criminal, so be it. I expect anyone who rationally believes that this opens up a whole slew of dangers on the road, from security concerns to self-incrimination to, quite simply, bugs would be the ones to use pre-kill switch vehicles.
ovi256 5y ago
I would like to clarify my comment: The obvious vulnerability of a remote kill switch would also push criminals, at least those professional enough to plan ahead, to use them. Not implying that only criminals would use them. There are many valid reasons to prefer them.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
Stop assuming everyone is a criminal. Don't give government this level of control over your life or you become China with a Social Credit Score. We already have a financial credit score and we know how much that is already abused. Screw Big Brother.

rascul 5y ago

> I would prefer that the change is to build a BAC measurer into every car. This is a technology that we have today, it is being used and it is efficient enough that it continues to be used. There are problems. Having to do a breath test in the middle of your drive. Can't drive after eating or brushing teeth. No mints or chewing gum while driving. Must be very careful with medications. Regular calibration. Vehicle service might require a certified technician to verify the device isn't tampered with. False positive means you can't get to work on time. Sharing a vehicle is much more difficult. This is a very high burden to put on the average driver who has done nothing to deserve it.

DonHopkins 5y ago

Performance or Impairment Testing is a much better alternative to Drug Testing for alcohol or heroin or PCP or being sleepy or having just broken up with your girlfriend or anything else that might cause a crash: require the driver to play a video game that proves they have good reflexes and quick reaction time. This is not a new idea: Performance Tests vs. Drug Tests. Dec. 25, 1990: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-12-25-fi-7155-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-12-25-fi-7155-s... >The Factor 1000 test is simple and takes only about 30 seconds. It consists of a software program on a personal computer equipped with a special keyboard and a control knob. >Before starting on a job, the worker uses the knob to try to keep a swaying pointer in the center of the screen. The pointer swings faster and faster from left to right, and the test ends when the pointer swings too far, as it inevitably does. Workers pass if they can keep it relatively steady long enough to show that they are up to their own, predetermined standard. >The computerized hand-eye coordination test indicates whether a person is too impaired to work for any reason--drugs, alcohol or even because of a sleepless night. The Advantages of Impairment Testing over Drug Testing to Improve Workplace Safety: https://predictivesafety.com/the-advantages-of-impairment-testing-over-drug-testing-to-improve-workplace-safety/ https://predictivesafety.com/the-advantages-of-impairment-te... >Since President Regan’s mandate for drug testing Federal employees in 1988, many private sector employers followed suit, and continue to follow suit, by testing their employees for drug use, especially in safety-sensitive industries like construction and manufacturing, under the impression that drug testing helps create and maintain a safe workplace (1). However, more and more employers are beginning to recognize the limitations and detriments of drug testing as a tool for enhancing workplace safety, understanding that drug testing is not a preventative safety measure if it can be considered a safety measure at all. [...] >Cultural changes notwithstanding, some experts have been advocating in favor of impairment testing over drug testing for many years because drug testing is not a preventative measure, as described above. A 2010 report by the National Workrights Institute put it succinctly: >Impairment testing is the practice of determining which workers in safety sensitive positions put themselves and others at risk by directly measuring workers’ current fitness for duty. Urine testing, in contrast, attempts to determine which workers have used specific substances known to cause impairment in the relatively recent past. (10)

gremloni 5y ago

No. I think we should just accept the deaths and losses from drunk driving and thefts as long as mitigation involves universal control over items I own. Not to mention, you’ll probably just end up buying humid air blowers that get past this block.