4 ms·

Isn't a very similar EU regulation already well beyond the proposal stage at this point and is currently getting implemented? If that's actually the case, I do

Isn't a very similar EU regulation already well beyond the proposal stage at this point and is currently getting implemented? If that's actually the case, I don't see how it wouldn't make it to the US once the systems needed are already available. Unless the alcohol interlock system/drowsiness detection isn't a type of killswitch, though from what I understand that's pretty much what's being proposed in the US. > Summary All new vehicles sold from May 2022 must be fitted with advanced safety features, including: monitors that detect when a driver has become drowsy or distracted emergency stop signal to help prevent rear-end collisions rear-view camera or parking sensors alcohol interlock system to prevent drunk driving. These systems will help reduce serious accidents on Europe’s roads. This initiative sets out the test procedures and technical requirements for approving vehicles fitted with advanced safety features. [Source: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12224-Vehicle-safety-technical-rules-test-procedures-for-advanced-safety-features_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...]

blqrt 4y ago
The drowsiness detection isn't a kill switch, but the camera version of it is beyond creepy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_drowsiness_detection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_drowsiness_detection Cars used to be a safe space where one could get away from being monitored and listened to by other people. This is no longer the case. I wonder why people accept it. Does it appeal to the narcissism, i.e., people like to be monitored at all times because it makes them feel important?
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  The european regulation discusses using cameras too! IIRC the manufacturers have a certain detection percentage threshold to achieve and they have commented that they will require stuff like visual muscle twitching detection, eye tracking, head tilt evaluation and even heartbeat sensors etc.
- philistine 4y ago
  Cars are a health crisis. So many people have died needlessly due to cars that it’s easy to understand Europe’s drive to make them safer.
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
    But road safety has only increased in terms of accidents per km driven. There's just too many cars on the road now. I think we should push for full self driving asap though. Taking the driver out of the equation means no longer stuffing cars wth systems intended to second-guess the driver and their abilities. No more need to check for mobile phone use because the occupants are free to do what they want. No more need for speed cameras or distance between cars. More efficiency due to people not constantly overtaking because they're in a hurry. Right now it's becoming this insane situation where a driver is not trusted at all and second-guessed at every corner. I don't own a car anymore and I hope I will never need one again. I don't want to drive like this, constantly being looked over my shoulder. It's not worth that hassle.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      > Right now it's becoming this insane situation where a driver is not trusted at all and second-guessed at every corner. Well a self driving car will give you no control over where you are going at all, i am not sure thats better from the point of view of liberty.
      - GekkePrutser 4y ago
        Yes but you no longer have the burden of control and responsibility. That's a huge difference. Personally I hate driving so I'd be really happy if I could just read a book, surf the web or watch a movie while travelling. For me driving is pure wasted time. I know some people actually enjoy driving :) But for me it feels this way.
        donw 4y ago
        > Yes but you no longer have the burden of control and responsibility. Sounds like slavery with extra marketing.
- Cicero22 4y ago
  I wonder why people accept it. Does it appeal to the narcissism, i.e., people like to be monitored at all times because it makes them feel important? I think it's pretty much like boiling a frog. The trend will continue, and people will have less and less privacy. At this point the marginal benefit of privacy in a car doesn't matter to most people, as saddening as that is.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  > Cars used to be a safe space where one could get away from being monitored and listened to by other people. This is no longer the case Now it's the complete opposite. You have way better privacy on an feet or a train.
- illiac786 4y ago
  >Cars used to be a safe space I think you should specify "safe from digital tracking" because cars are everything but safe, they cause thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths each year in my country for example. And I'm not even counting the deaths and sicknesses due to car pollution. I profoundly dislike cars and hope for a future where car ownership will be a thing of the past and there will be only self driving cabs / buses / cargo bikes, hopefully all electric, ideally hydrogen powered. I know, I know, I'm dreamin' =)
dtech 4y ago
At first glance I don't see how any of these qualify as remote kill switches.
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  I agree that they aren't outright remote kill switches. But a tamper-proof on/off switch, that will presumably be almost impossible to trivially bypass, coupled with remote updates... It's getting close. Especially since those systems will need to be easy to update OTA. And even if there are no malicious OTA capabilities (though the EU has already shown interest in LEO being able to remotely disable a car a few years ago) , they are using pretty subjective measures that might affect your driving experience or render your car unusable after a single update. What if the drowsiness detection does not work well on your skin color or on your heartbeat, or on your eye shape? I guess It's just a bit creepy to me that your own car can police you autonomously with little recourse.

blqrt 4y ago

The drowsiness detection isn't a kill switch, but the camera version of it is beyond creepy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_drowsiness_detection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_drowsiness_detection Cars used to be a safe space where one could get away from being monitored and listened to by other people. This is no longer the case. I wonder why people accept it. Does it appeal to the narcissism, i.e., people like to be monitored at all times because it makes them feel important?

mardifoufs 4y ago
The european regulation discusses using cameras too! IIRC the manufacturers have a certain detection percentage threshold to achieve and they have commented that they will require stuff like visual muscle twitching detection, eye tracking, head tilt evaluation and even heartbeat sensors etc.
philistine 4y ago
Cars are a health crisis. So many people have died needlessly due to cars that it’s easy to understand Europe’s drive to make them safer.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  But road safety has only increased in terms of accidents per km driven. There's just too many cars on the road now. I think we should push for full self driving asap though. Taking the driver out of the equation means no longer stuffing cars wth systems intended to second-guess the driver and their abilities. No more need to check for mobile phone use because the occupants are free to do what they want. No more need for speed cameras or distance between cars. More efficiency due to people not constantly overtaking because they're in a hurry. Right now it's becoming this insane situation where a driver is not trusted at all and second-guessed at every corner. I don't own a car anymore and I hope I will never need one again. I don't want to drive like this, constantly being looked over my shoulder. It's not worth that hassle.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > Right now it's becoming this insane situation where a driver is not trusted at all and second-guessed at every corner. Well a self driving car will give you no control over where you are going at all, i am not sure thats better from the point of view of liberty.
    - GekkePrutser 4y ago
      Yes but you no longer have the burden of control and responsibility. That's a huge difference. Personally I hate driving so I'd be really happy if I could just read a book, surf the web or watch a movie while travelling. For me driving is pure wasted time. I know some people actually enjoy driving :) But for me it feels this way.
      - donw 4y ago
        > Yes but you no longer have the burden of control and responsibility. Sounds like slavery with extra marketing.
Cicero22 4y ago
I wonder why people accept it. Does it appeal to the narcissism, i.e., people like to be monitored at all times because it makes them feel important? I think it's pretty much like boiling a frog. The trend will continue, and people will have less and less privacy. At this point the marginal benefit of privacy in a car doesn't matter to most people, as saddening as that is.
goodpoint 4y ago
> Cars used to be a safe space where one could get away from being monitored and listened to by other people. This is no longer the case Now it's the complete opposite. You have way better privacy on an feet or a train.
illiac786 4y ago
>Cars used to be a safe space I think you should specify "safe from digital tracking" because cars are everything but safe, they cause thousands of injuries and hundreds of deaths each year in my country for example. And I'm not even counting the deaths and sicknesses due to car pollution. I profoundly dislike cars and hope for a future where car ownership will be a thing of the past and there will be only self driving cabs / buses / cargo bikes, hopefully all electric, ideally hydrogen powered. I know, I know, I'm dreamin' =)

dtech 4y ago

At first glance I don't see how any of these qualify as remote kill switches.

mardifoufs 4y ago
I agree that they aren't outright remote kill switches. But a tamper-proof on/off switch, that will presumably be almost impossible to trivially bypass, coupled with remote updates... It's getting close. Especially since those systems will need to be easy to update OTA. And even if there are no malicious OTA capabilities (though the EU has already shown interest in LEO being able to remotely disable a car a few years ago) , they are using pretty subjective measures that might affect your driving experience or render your car unusable after a single update. What if the drowsiness detection does not work well on your skin color or on your heartbeat, or on your eye shape? I guess It's just a bit creepy to me that your own car can police you autonomously with little recourse.