• Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    24 days ago

    This keeps getting buried by the algos, but I see this requirement as a real problem. Unreliable tech that stops your car if it thinks you’re not driving right… and already current implementations have lots of false positive actions. Yeah, nope. This won’t go well.

      • ulterno@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        And everyone behind who brakes to avoid accident instantly gets their premium increased, which they need to pay retroactively to get the payout for this incident.

    • a4ng3l@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      24 days ago

      Now if this piece of regulation passes what’s preventing your government from allowing full blown rollout of ai based fines system using camera networks for example ? This crap lowers the bar in terms of human validation a whole lot.

      • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        I’m about to say something that can be read as me supporting this shit, and I do not.

        However.

        Driving fatigued is about as unsafe as driving drunk. Assuming you are actually fatigued.

        There was a time in the past when we allowed people to actively drink and drive.

        I think - for the most part - not allowing that was a good idea.

        IN THEORY preventing people from driving fatigued is not a bad idea.

        IN PRACTICE we all know it won’t be as simple as that.

        But the basic idea itself is… not all bad. It’s a pity we know it’ll go to shit.

      • tyler@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        24 days ago

        Over the sensors…

        There’s zero chance that if these sensors fail they disable the car. You wouldn’t be able to bring them in for work. So covering the sensors should easily work.

        • XLE@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          23 days ago

          Think they’d just tell you to tow the car? Tesla vehicles do this, and right now they are leading the auto industry in making cars worse.

          • tyler@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 days ago

            And yet you can disable the annoying slow moving beeping in any normal EV without it shutting down the car.

            Car manufacturers will do the minimum possible to not piss off customers. They’re not going to deal with all the craziness of what happens if the sensors stop working when driving, and how it would slow down the car, etc. they’re just gonna make it fail safe.

      • plz1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        24 days ago

        Infrared sensors would be defeat-able. Integrated telemetry stuff (speed, driving habits, aggressiveness) no so much.

    • dogs0n@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      The guy in india getting paid $0.01 per check to look into your drivers side webcam won’t like that

  • Wimster@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    23 days ago

    Ofcourse this would happen. Every EV car has a sort-kind-of-black-box and a gps. So every car knows exactely what speed it is allowed to drive on the roads. In the future - when you have an accident - the insurrance company can investigate the black box of your car and see immediately what speed you were driving on that particular gps-point. With your mobile phone connected to the car, it can also see immediately who was driving the car, etc… It was written in the stars many years ago.

  • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    23 days ago

    lol like when I rented a Penske truck that had lane departure that kept malfunctioning.

    Kept thinking I was on the road besides the freeway and slamming the brakes because I was over the speed limit.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    22 days ago

    And this is just one of three reasons why I will never own a vehicle manufactured after 2006.

  • Turret3857@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    23 days ago

    The federal government promises this surveillance saves 9,000-10,000 lives annually.

    Wikipedia says roughly 42k people died of car related injuries in 2022.

    So, the government is promising that this brand new technology that has not had any field testing whatsoever is going to reduce car related deaths by 23%?

    They’re lucky theres no way to sue over a broken promise.

    Here’s a great way to reduce car deaths to near 0%

    functional public transit.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 days ago

      It’s not about reducing road fatalities.

      It’s about surveilling political enemies.

      It’ll have sudden false positives the moment you talk about how bad the government is. It’ll suddenly appear in counter-terrorism surveillance.

  • whelk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    Joke’s on them, I can’t afford a new car

    (Wouldn’t buy one if I could)

  • Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    This technology will just prove what we already know. Most people shouldn’t be driving. Bring on the trains and buses!