3 ms·

Unfortunately the government is imminently planning on requiring "smart" features like a law enforcement lowjack for "hot cars"[0] and a remote "kill switch" [1

Unfortunately the government is imminently planning on requiring "smart" features like a law enforcement lowjack for "hot cars"[0] and a remote "kill switch" [1]. Granted, I'd be more than okay building a ranch vehicle or purchasing an old car and deleting these features as willful non-compliance. [0] https://hothardware.com/news/bidens-infrastructure-bill-mandatory-backdoor-car-kill-switch https://hothardware.com/news/bidens-infrastructure-bill-mand... (hot hardware is an oddly good source of electrical engineering news too!) [1] https://miami.cbslocal.com/2021/12/29/new-federal-regulations-will-require-new-cars-to-be-equipped-with-hot-car-alert-system/#:~:text=linkedin-,New%20Federal%20Regulations%20Will%20Require%20New%20Cars%20To,With%20Hot%20Car%20Alert%20System&text=The%20new%20provision%20in%20the,has%20one%20in%20most%20models https://miami.cbslocal.com/2021/12/29/new-federal-regulation....

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29427068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29427068 for a discussion about that, from the top comment: > This is a terrible description of what the law actually does. Let's shine some light on the FUD. The law, H.R. 3684 (as enrolled), defines an "advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology" as a system which can do /one/ of the following: 1. "passively monitor the performance of a driver... to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired... and prevent or limit [car] operation if an impairment is detected." 2. "passively and accurately" detect whether someone's BAC exceeds the Federal limit, and prevent or limit car operation if it's detected. 3. Both. This will apply only after the DOT finalizes a rule describing what all those things actually mean in terms of manufacture. The law requires that the Secretary publish this rule within the next three years, unless they think it can't be done, in which case they can push it out another three years. That rule must give car manufactures at least another two years to implement the requirement. It also gives the DOT an out to say that it can't be done, in which case in 2031, they need to write a report to Congress to say why it can't be done. In software terms, this is a user story that was just submitted for development. It's Congress asking the executive branch to do some work, but not actually forcing them to do so. (But in the far-right wing press, "request to explore tech that keeps drunk people from driving" becomes "bill will mandate kill switch!" because of the click bait sound of it)

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29427068 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29427068 for a discussion about that, from the top comment: > This is a terrible description of what the law actually does. Let's shine some light on the FUD. The law, H.R. 3684 (as enrolled), defines an "advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology" as a system which can do /one/ of the following: 1. "passively monitor the performance of a driver... to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired... and prevent or limit [car] operation if an impairment is detected." 2. "passively and accurately" detect whether someone's BAC exceeds the Federal limit, and prevent or limit car operation if it's detected. 3. Both. This will apply only after the DOT finalizes a rule describing what all those things actually mean in terms of manufacture. The law requires that the Secretary publish this rule within the next three years, unless they think it can't be done, in which case they can push it out another three years. That rule must give car manufactures at least another two years to implement the requirement. It also gives the DOT an out to say that it can't be done, in which case in 2031, they need to write a report to Congress to say why it can't be done. In software terms, this is a user story that was just submitted for development. It's Congress asking the executive branch to do some work, but not actually forcing them to do so. (But in the far-right wing press, "request to explore tech that keeps drunk people from driving" becomes "bill will mandate kill switch!" because of the click bait sound of it)