7 ms·

I once helped someone get their car home after one of these was installed. Their license would not be returned until it was installed, but they weren't allowed

I once helped someone get their car home after one of these was installed. Their license would not be returned until it was installed, but they weren't allowed to leave it on the lot. Someone else drove it there, and then I got to experience the breathalyzer to drive it home. The interesting part is how bad the interlock was. First off, it can apparently randomly not work, so you get three tries. Worse yet, per the official documentation, apparently they can misdetect an ignition while driving at speed, and when that happens you have to pull over and blow within thirty seconds. Now, this is not something you can do while driving, as you have to look at the camera while you do it, on top of needing to have a deep breath. There's no motivation to improve this, because the customer is the legal system, not the person who has to have it installed

SilverElfin 7mo ago
Isn’t there a proposed law to install these into every single new car?
- bri3d 7mo ago
  Not really the same. There are proposals to require OEMs to install driver monitoring, but it’s usually IR camera based rather than blow in a tube fuel cell based. These systems are probably going to be a mess but the technology isn’t really comparable to DUI interlock devices and the unreliability of those systems is orthogonal.
- astura 7mo ago
  No, the 2021 infrastructure bill required automakers to install passive technology (passive meaning not requiring any specific actions from the driver) to prevent drunk driving by some future date. However, such technology doesn't really exist yet.
  - Auracle 7mo ago
    Eh, with lane keeping features I don’t think it’d be hard to at least detect someone swerving a lot. Granted, I don’t think that would detect people that aren’t super drunk, but it’s something. I might be wrong on that assumption - I don’t drink, myself.
    - volkl48 7mo ago
      As is commonly commented on by cartoonists: In plenty of places driving consistently within the lines might be the actual sign you're drunk. Because the roads/potholes are bad enough that you shouldn't be, if you value your suspension.
      - Auracle 6mo ago
        I live in a northern state so I certainly have experience with potholes, but I've never seen a road so bad that it would cause a false positive like that. Our local dying mall though? Phew. It amazes me whoever owns the mall doesn't at least go out there with some asphalt themselves.
- sigmoid10 7mo ago
  Nothing specific yet, but the legal groundwork has been laid both in the US and in the EU. Starting in July, all new cars sold in the EU will need to be able to fit after-market alcohol interlocks. In the US, interlocks are already mandatory for convicted DUIers in most states, but new cars will also have to come with factory installed drunk driving prevention technology in the coming years. We just don't know how far that mandate will go eventually.
  - pas 7mo ago
    obviously it will require an age verification, also you need to tell Google that you want to go somewhere 24 hours in advance, and Apple gets 30% of the revenue that gas stations make.
  - londons_explore 7mo ago
    There is no security protocol though. It will be trivial to buy an interlock which always returns 'ok to drive'.
    - overfeed 7mo ago
      Manufacturers are now encrypting Canbus traffic, voluntarily on current and future models. Buying or selling tools designed to break the law is already illegal - trivial or not. If a driver gets a DUI and possess a NOOP interlock, they are getting an additional charge, and get to help am investigation into the illicit device supply chain.
      - m3047 7mo ago
        > Buying or selling tools designed to break the law is already illegal - trivial or not. I'm curious how this will play out. The "John Deer" exemption from the DMCA comes to mind, not sure if it's strictly for farm equipment or still in effect.
- kube-system 7mo ago
  There is no proposal to require these janky ass aftermarket units, nor require any type of interlock at all. NHTSA was directed to write some guidelines/rules around the implementation of passive impairment detection as OEM features. They have yet to do so, probably because it is flaky technology. My guess is that the final rule implementation will be similar to the distracted driver detection that is already in many new vehicles.
- clickety_clack 7mo ago
  Old cars sound better and better every year now.
  - nslsm 7mo ago
    They’ll just make it illegal for you to drive them.
    - iso1631 7mo ago
      Its illegal to drive under the influence now. "Just making something illegal" doesn't work
    - mothballed 7mo ago
      Meanwhile in much of the USA registration laws aren't enforced. The last time my car was totaled (hit and run) the police didn't even show up for that either so my insurance company just ate the whole cost. DUI laws themselves are largely only enforced to the extent the accused consents to bothering to show up to court.
wildzzz 7mo ago
Having to blow while you're already driving is supposed to be a feature. It's to dissuade people from successfully turning on their car, immediately drinking, and then driving.
- Auracle 7mo ago
  30 seconds seems a bit fast to force that though, no? There’s not always a safe place to pull over.
  - stronglikedan 7mo ago
    If it only kicks in at 45 or lower (i.e., not the highway) then there's always a safe place to pull over. I have no idea how it actually does work though, thankfully.
    - lazide 7mo ago
      Stuck in stop and go traffic on the freeway doesn’t sound like a good place to me, but I’ve never had a DUI so meh?
    - ranger_danger 6mo ago
      I take it you've never been stuck in slow traffic on a long narrow bridge, or highway sections that surround you with concrete barriers on both sides for miles. There is nowhere to pull over.
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
- shimman 7mo ago
  Is this comment a joke or do you not understand how dangerous it is to ask a driver to blow into a breathalyzer while operating a vehicle? All this seems to be is a company collecting corporate welfare while doing the bare minimum. Such companies should both be sanctioned and have their leadership investigated for potential fraud. If you receive public dollars to function, the public should expect some modicum of sensibility and accountability.
helterskelter 7mo ago
I knew somebody with an interlock and if they were around too much car exhaust in a relatively enclosed space, the ethanol in the air would trip the detector apparently.
profdevloper 7mo ago
I was the DD for my friend's bachelor party and as we were leaving the bar, I saw this older gentleman struggling to start his vehicle. I had a hard time making out what he was telling me, but it looked like he had one of these devices on his car. Being the Good Samaritan that I am, I blew into the device, his car started, and he went happily on his way.
- joachimma 7mo ago
  I assume you're joking, Either way. One morning when I took the bus to work the bus driver had repeated problems getting the bus to start due to the breathalyser. I heard him complain to the passenger behind him, about it malfunctioning. The passenger volunteered to test this theory, by also blowing into the device. The driver handed him the hose, the passenger gave it a go, the bus started, and the driver shrugged his shoulders, and off we went, only slightly delayed. I'm not sure if this is preventable.
  - syntheticnature 7mo ago
    If it's as flaky as my experience upthread suggests, maybe it was just that. At least, that's what I hope, for the sake of those on the bus
  - mrguyorama 7mo ago
    Why does the bus have a breathalyzer rather than a damn manager who can fire the worker who smells of booze?
    - donkey_brains 7mo ago
      Dunno where the parent comment was referring to, but different countries have different standards. In Colombia the bus transit stations all have breathalyzer stations and the drivers have to pass the breathalyzer before starting their shifts. It was pretty wild to see as an outsider but completely unremarkable to everyone else.
- MisterTea 7mo ago
joquarky 7mo ago
I've wondered what happens with these when a forest fire is bearing down.

SilverElfin 7mo ago

Isn’t there a proposed law to install these into every single new car?

bri3d 7mo ago
Not really the same. There are proposals to require OEMs to install driver monitoring, but it’s usually IR camera based rather than blow in a tube fuel cell based. These systems are probably going to be a mess but the technology isn’t really comparable to DUI interlock devices and the unreliability of those systems is orthogonal.
astura 7mo ago
No, the 2021 infrastructure bill required automakers to install passive technology (passive meaning not requiring any specific actions from the driver) to prevent drunk driving by some future date. However, such technology doesn't really exist yet.
- Auracle 7mo ago
  Eh, with lane keeping features I don’t think it’d be hard to at least detect someone swerving a lot. Granted, I don’t think that would detect people that aren’t super drunk, but it’s something. I might be wrong on that assumption - I don’t drink, myself.
  - volkl48 7mo ago
    As is commonly commented on by cartoonists: In plenty of places driving consistently within the lines might be the actual sign you're drunk. Because the roads/potholes are bad enough that you shouldn't be, if you value your suspension.
    - Auracle 6mo ago
      I live in a northern state so I certainly have experience with potholes, but I've never seen a road so bad that it would cause a false positive like that. Our local dying mall though? Phew. It amazes me whoever owns the mall doesn't at least go out there with some asphalt themselves.
sigmoid10 7mo ago
Nothing specific yet, but the legal groundwork has been laid both in the US and in the EU. Starting in July, all new cars sold in the EU will need to be able to fit after-market alcohol interlocks. In the US, interlocks are already mandatory for convicted DUIers in most states, but new cars will also have to come with factory installed drunk driving prevention technology in the coming years. We just don't know how far that mandate will go eventually.
- pas 7mo ago
  obviously it will require an age verification, also you need to tell Google that you want to go somewhere 24 hours in advance, and Apple gets 30% of the revenue that gas stations make.
- londons_explore 7mo ago
  There is no security protocol though. It will be trivial to buy an interlock which always returns 'ok to drive'.
  - overfeed 7mo ago
    Manufacturers are now encrypting Canbus traffic, voluntarily on current and future models. Buying or selling tools designed to break the law is already illegal - trivial or not. If a driver gets a DUI and possess a NOOP interlock, they are getting an additional charge, and get to help am investigation into the illicit device supply chain.
    - m3047 7mo ago
      > Buying or selling tools designed to break the law is already illegal - trivial or not. I'm curious how this will play out. The "John Deer" exemption from the DMCA comes to mind, not sure if it's strictly for farm equipment or still in effect.
kube-system 7mo ago
There is no proposal to require these janky ass aftermarket units, nor require any type of interlock at all. NHTSA was directed to write some guidelines/rules around the implementation of passive impairment detection as OEM features. They have yet to do so, probably because it is flaky technology. My guess is that the final rule implementation will be similar to the distracted driver detection that is already in many new vehicles.
clickety_clack 7mo ago
Old cars sound better and better every year now.
- nslsm 7mo ago
  They’ll just make it illegal for you to drive them.
  - iso1631 7mo ago
    Its illegal to drive under the influence now. "Just making something illegal" doesn't work
  - mothballed 7mo ago
    Meanwhile in much of the USA registration laws aren't enforced. The last time my car was totaled (hit and run) the police didn't even show up for that either so my insurance company just ate the whole cost. DUI laws themselves are largely only enforced to the extent the accused consents to bothering to show up to court.

wildzzz 7mo ago

Having to blow while you're already driving is supposed to be a feature. It's to dissuade people from successfully turning on their car, immediately drinking, and then driving.

Auracle 7mo ago
30 seconds seems a bit fast to force that though, no? There’s not always a safe place to pull over.
- stronglikedan 7mo ago
  If it only kicks in at 45 or lower (i.e., not the highway) then there's always a safe place to pull over. I have no idea how it actually does work though, thankfully.
  - lazide 7mo ago
    Stuck in stop and go traffic on the freeway doesn’t sound like a good place to me, but I’ve never had a DUI so meh?
  - ranger_danger 6mo ago
    I take it you've never been stuck in slow traffic on a long narrow bridge, or highway sections that surround you with concrete barriers on both sides for miles. There is nowhere to pull over.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
shimman 7mo ago
Is this comment a joke or do you not understand how dangerous it is to ask a driver to blow into a breathalyzer while operating a vehicle? All this seems to be is a company collecting corporate welfare while doing the bare minimum. Such companies should both be sanctioned and have their leadership investigated for potential fraud. If you receive public dollars to function, the public should expect some modicum of sensibility and accountability.

helterskelter 7mo ago

I knew somebody with an interlock and if they were around too much car exhaust in a relatively enclosed space, the ethanol in the air would trip the detector apparently.

profdevloper 7mo ago

I was the DD for my friend's bachelor party and as we were leaving the bar, I saw this older gentleman struggling to start his vehicle. I had a hard time making out what he was telling me, but it looked like he had one of these devices on his car. Being the Good Samaritan that I am, I blew into the device, his car started, and he went happily on his way.

joachimma 7mo ago
I assume you're joking, Either way. One morning when I took the bus to work the bus driver had repeated problems getting the bus to start due to the breathalyser. I heard him complain to the passenger behind him, about it malfunctioning. The passenger volunteered to test this theory, by also blowing into the device. The driver handed him the hose, the passenger gave it a go, the bus started, and the driver shrugged his shoulders, and off we went, only slightly delayed. I'm not sure if this is preventable.
- syntheticnature 7mo ago
  If it's as flaky as my experience upthread suggests, maybe it was just that. At least, that's what I hope, for the sake of those on the bus
- mrguyorama 7mo ago
  Why does the bus have a breathalyzer rather than a damn manager who can fire the worker who smells of booze?
  - donkey_brains 7mo ago
    Dunno where the parent comment was referring to, but different countries have different standards. In Colombia the bus transit stations all have breathalyzer stations and the drivers have to pass the breathalyzer before starting their shifts. It was pretty wild to see as an outsider but completely unremarkable to everyone else.
MisterTea 7mo ago

joquarky 7mo ago

I've wondered what happens with these when a forest fire is bearing down.