5 ms·

US Government plans to force all new vehicles to have a “kill switch”

21 points by drak0n1c 5y ago

uejfiweun 5y ago
Another prediction that Minority Report got absolutely right. I would give anything to read the 2054 Bible the creators made for that movie, as they clearly had some prescient minds.
- floxy 5y ago
  Did they predict the future or invent the future?
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    Minority Report certainly had an influence on future designs of interfaces, for sure.
albatross13 5y ago
Hm..the link is a 404 :(
dTal 5y ago
The police already have the authority to chase you, shoot your tires, throw spike strips in front of you, ram you, and anything else they deem necessary to forcibly stop you. Formalizing this power in the form of technology which obviates the need for such hazardous measures doesn't really seem like some terrible encroachment on civil liberties.
- loceng 5y ago
  It sounds to me like the equivalent of taking your guns away. A zero effort kill switch makes the cost to the state much closer to zero if they don't have the counter force of individuals - and forget bad actors or actual criminals, I'm speaking to the safeguard and mechanism of making sure the individual is adequately equipped to take on a potential tyrannical threat with other sovereign individuals.
- Andys 5y ago
  But for those traditional techniques, they have to be "right there". Presumably this new technology will allow them to disable the vehicle remotely from potentially thousand of miles away.
- bigodbiel 5y ago
  It’s all about making this empowerment as frictionless as possible, preferably with a press of a button, no need to hot pursuit and then filing reports. Which to me is troubling.
- jevoten 5y ago
  They already have the authority (if they get a warrant) to bug your home, too. Wouldn't it be so much easier if all homes came with bugs pre-installed (and illegal to remove), and the warrant would just allow the police to remotely activate them? In fact, they have the authority to arrest you, too. But that can involve a dangerous chase, the subject can resist, etc.. wouldn't it make sense to obviate the need for such hazardous measures if everyone had to wear a shock collar? Then instead of a dangerous physical confrontation, non-compliant subjects can be subdued with a safe, remotely-triggered shock. Forcibly resisting authority is never legitimate (that's what democracy and the legal system are for), and certainly never legal, so such measures wouldn't infringe on any rights. After all, they only enable already legal police actions, and the only civilian activity that they hamper is illegal.
  - salawat 5y ago
    Legal systems are just violence with blood spill that's more metaphorical than most care to get up in arms about. I really wish people would keep solidly in minds eye that what we've got is the worst.... Besides everything else we tried.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  The encroachment on civil liberties is when things you own are made to work against your interests.
ss48 5y ago
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/infrastructure-bill-track-drivers/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/infrastructure-bill-track-... For some context, since the link is broken.
999900000999 5y ago
>The other problem with backdoors is that they are accessible to hackers. More like a bad OTA update stops your car from turning on. Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). I hope to never own a car again, but this is bad.
- WFHRenaissance 5y ago
  > Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). Do you have a source for this? Just curious
  - kylehotchkiss 5y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U2eDJnwz_s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U2eDJnwz_s Entertaining take on the topic by John Oliver that touches on the subject
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). This doesn't really bother me. I don't like when people don't have total control over things they own, but if you default on a secured loan, you don't own the collateral anymore.
  - 999900000999 5y ago
    This assumes the system works 100% of the time. I'm more than okay with them physically taking the car from you, but imagine a nightmare scenario where your wife has a stroke and instead of being able to drive her to the hospital 5 miles away you watch her die since your Tesla XL couldn't verify payment status. Mistakes happen, Stripe API down, no driving for you .
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      But can't mistakes happen with low-tech repossession too?
macilacilove 5y ago
automotives to become "governmotives": takes you wherever the government approves you to be.
finite_jest 5y ago
Archived version (the link currently gives a 404 error): https://archive.is/FYtiV https://archive.is/FYtiV
danhab99 5y ago
Did you guys even read the bill? It's not a remote kill switch anybody can flick. It's some vaguely defined system to detect when the driver is driving unsafely. The bill is so vauge about what the thing actually is that I don't believe this is ever gonna happen. Atleast not before AIs start driving more cars than people do safer than people are.
- cbsks 5y ago
  You are right. I’m glad that the article has a prominent link to the bill’s text. It’s short, please read it before jumping to any conclusions. It is a requirement for new vehicles to “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation” when the vehicle either measures the driver’s blood alcohol content and it’s above the limit OR detects that the driver may be impaired. That’s all. It doesn’t mention anything about law enforcement or remote access.
  - dTal 5y ago
    Hm, the article's been 404 for me since I first saw this posting, 9 hours ago. Are you saying it's up for you?
    - cbsks 5y ago
      I must have gotten lucky when I read it. It’s up again now. The bill’s text is here: https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/BILLS-117s1331is.pdf https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/BILLS-117s1331is.pdf
King-Aaron 5y ago
Good thing I already have a kill switch in my car - but I'm guessing a bright red switch on the dash isn't what the government has in mind
dismalpedigree 5y ago
I’ll be first in line for a tool or device that neutralizes this. I buy it, I own it. I feel the same about software updates that remove functionality as well as products which are tamper resistant.
haspoken 5y ago
Archive of the original: https://archive.is/ox5cC https://archive.is/ox5cC Link to current version: https://reclaimthenet.org/us-government-planned-to-force-all-new-vehicles-to-have-a-kill-switch/ https://reclaimthenet.org/us-government-planned-to-force-all... Apparently the original "plans" became "planned" in the url

21 points by drak0n1c 5y ago

Another prediction that Minority Report got absolutely right. I would give anything to read the 2054 Bible the creators made for that movie, as they clearly had some prescient minds.

floxy 5y ago
Did they predict the future or invent the future?
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  Minority Report certainly had an influence on future designs of interfaces, for sure.

albatross13 5y ago

Hm..the link is a 404 :(

dTal 5y ago

The police already have the authority to chase you, shoot your tires, throw spike strips in front of you, ram you, and anything else they deem necessary to forcibly stop you. Formalizing this power in the form of technology which obviates the need for such hazardous measures doesn't really seem like some terrible encroachment on civil liberties.

loceng 5y ago
It sounds to me like the equivalent of taking your guns away. A zero effort kill switch makes the cost to the state much closer to zero if they don't have the counter force of individuals - and forget bad actors or actual criminals, I'm speaking to the safeguard and mechanism of making sure the individual is adequately equipped to take on a potential tyrannical threat with other sovereign individuals.
Andys 5y ago
But for those traditional techniques, they have to be "right there". Presumably this new technology will allow them to disable the vehicle remotely from potentially thousand of miles away.
bigodbiel 5y ago
It’s all about making this empowerment as frictionless as possible, preferably with a press of a button, no need to hot pursuit and then filing reports. Which to me is troubling.
jevoten 5y ago
They already have the authority (if they get a warrant) to bug your home, too. Wouldn't it be so much easier if all homes came with bugs pre-installed (and illegal to remove), and the warrant would just allow the police to remotely activate them? In fact, they have the authority to arrest you, too. But that can involve a dangerous chase, the subject can resist, etc.. wouldn't it make sense to obviate the need for such hazardous measures if everyone had to wear a shock collar? Then instead of a dangerous physical confrontation, non-compliant subjects can be subdued with a safe, remotely-triggered shock. Forcibly resisting authority is never legitimate (that's what democracy and the legal system are for), and certainly never legal, so such measures wouldn't infringe on any rights. After all, they only enable already legal police actions, and the only civilian activity that they hamper is illegal.
- salawat 5y ago
  Legal systems are just violence with blood spill that's more metaphorical than most care to get up in arms about. I really wish people would keep solidly in minds eye that what we've got is the worst.... Besides everything else we tried.
josephcsible 5y ago
The encroachment on civil liberties is when things you own are made to work against your interests.

ss48 5y ago

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/infrastructure-bill-track-drivers/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/infrastructure-bill-track-... For some context, since the link is broken.

999900000999 5y ago

>The other problem with backdoors is that they are accessible to hackers. More like a bad OTA update stops your car from turning on. Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). I hope to never own a car again, but this is bad.

WFHRenaissance 5y ago
> Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). Do you have a source for this? Just curious
- kylehotchkiss 5y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U2eDJnwz_s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U2eDJnwz_s Entertaining take on the topic by John Oliver that touches on the subject
josephcsible 5y ago
> Miss a car payment, remote shut down( this is already a thing for certain high risk buyers). This doesn't really bother me. I don't like when people don't have total control over things they own, but if you default on a secured loan, you don't own the collateral anymore.
- 999900000999 5y ago
  This assumes the system works 100% of the time. I'm more than okay with them physically taking the car from you, but imagine a nightmare scenario where your wife has a stroke and instead of being able to drive her to the hospital 5 miles away you watch her die since your Tesla XL couldn't verify payment status. Mistakes happen, Stripe API down, no driving for you .
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    But can't mistakes happen with low-tech repossession too?

macilacilove 5y ago

automotives to become "governmotives": takes you wherever the government approves you to be.

finite_jest 5y ago

Archived version (the link currently gives a 404 error): https://archive.is/FYtiV https://archive.is/FYtiV

danhab99 5y ago

Did you guys even read the bill? It's not a remote kill switch anybody can flick. It's some vaguely defined system to detect when the driver is driving unsafely. The bill is so vauge about what the thing actually is that I don't believe this is ever gonna happen. Atleast not before AIs start driving more cars than people do safer than people are.

cbsks 5y ago
You are right. I’m glad that the article has a prominent link to the bill’s text. It’s short, please read it before jumping to any conclusions. It is a requirement for new vehicles to “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation” when the vehicle either measures the driver’s blood alcohol content and it’s above the limit OR detects that the driver may be impaired. That’s all. It doesn’t mention anything about law enforcement or remote access.
- dTal 5y ago
  Hm, the article's been 404 for me since I first saw this posting, 9 hours ago. Are you saying it's up for you?
  - cbsks 5y ago
    I must have gotten lucky when I read it. It’s up again now. The bill’s text is here: https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/BILLS-117s1331is.pdf https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/BILLS-117s1331is.pdf

King-Aaron 5y ago

Good thing I already have a kill switch in my car - but I'm guessing a bright red switch on the dash isn't what the government has in mind

dismalpedigree 5y ago

I’ll be first in line for a tool or device that neutralizes this. I buy it, I own it. I feel the same about software updates that remove functionality as well as products which are tamper resistant.

haspoken 5y ago

Archive of the original: https://archive.is/ox5cC https://archive.is/ox5cC Link to current version: https://reclaimthenet.org/us-government-planned-to-force-all-new-vehicles-to-have-a-kill-switch/ https://reclaimthenet.org/us-government-planned-to-force-all... Apparently the original "plans" became "planned" in the url