Yeah, clearly that will be the only thing to come from this level of over reach. Clearly as long as your not doing anything untoward you have nothing to fear. Pre judgment of crime before it is committed just makes sense right?
Or your car will not start when you use the wrong mouthwash, or when you are the designated driver, or when in an emergency on the way to the hospital after using rubbing alcohol. Or you are drunk and get in your car for whatever reason and the doors lock and call the police when you had no intention of driving.
Or and here’s a fun one, not wanting to be treated like a fucking criminal with a item you paid many tens of thousands for!
And all that is off the top of my head before getting into the nightmare of who gets the data.
damn that sounds like valid concerns to raise if this tech was real and being implemented and you actually had real examples.
I bet this stuff that doesn’t exist would have a 5000% false positive rate and be based on a little camera drone that pops out of the car and follows you around to watch you to see when you drink
We have today a massive issue just with cameras in cars (remember when Tesla got caught watching people fuck in their home?). You rolling out the red carpet to have even more dystopian shit in the future is silly, and here let’s turn this around, if those technologic evils are not at risk of being made real, then why the fuck do you care that people are upset about a law mandating them in cars? Are you the outrage police?
The only thing the proposed regulation requires is passive BAC detection and preventing cars from operating above the legal limit. That still seems fine to me. The regulation would not require that information to leave the vehicle. Every new car is ALREADY recording a shit ton of stuff that isn’t your BAC and providing it to anyone who wants to buy it.
This is the dumbest possible place to draw the line.
Passive bac detection… And you after all this think that means anything not ripped right from a dystopian story written to warn us never to do the stupid thing you seem to want?
I don’t let my car record anything I do, and I am not forced to yet. No one at this time is forced into the nightmare, but if this shit becomes law they will be.
This regulation does not exist beyond the concept of ‘cars shouldn’t start if they detect that you’re drunk’.
Either they’re ignoring the actual directive to the NHTSA and using it as a surrogate to get mad at the concept of surveillance or arguing that a theoretical car that can tell you’re drunk should let you drive it anyway.
I mean I am getting pissed because it’s mostly the first one. People credulous enough to read this yahoo story and not get suspicious of ‘driver cameras in every car STARTING NEXT YEAR connected to AI that will decide if the car starts’. like yeah I probably would have first heard of this now and from a tiny article on yahoo that self-contradicts and doesn’t have any sources, seems legit. Or they literally just read the headline and they let the confirmation bias wash over them.
I thought the ragebait part of the yahoo post was so obviously bullshit that it wasn’t even worth calling out at first but apparently every lemming just took it at face value and thinks I’m defending ‘AI camera watching you and sending live video to fbi’.
I guess nothing is implied by saying ‘a fictional car that can tell you’re drunk should let you drunk drive’ or saying ‘my BAC behind the wheel is my business and nobody elses’
Find me a good reason that cars should start for people who are drunk.
“I deserve to be able to hide, very specifically, my BAC from an inanimate object that would only prevent me from starting a car while drunk. I pinky swear I have a reason to want this other than wanting to drive drunk” come on
Basic rights? Not being considered guilty in advance? Come now this is just getting silly.
You should just turn yourself in for diddiling children as we are making up quotes no one said as you clearly have the ability to be a child preditor and all that. Actually let’s just install a device that checks your arousal every time a child is within 50 meters of you, I mean unless you can find me a good reason why you should be able to live as a child molester.
wow imagine if you didn’t have the right to operate a car. they might even make you put yourself in a database and put some kind of identifiable marking on the outside of your car.
Find me a good reason that cars should start for people who are drunk.
“I deserve to be able to hide, very specifically, my BAC from an inanimate object that would only prevent me from starting a car while drunk. I pinky swear I have a reason to want this other than wanting to drive drunk” come on
try real fucking hard. Why would somebody be fine with all of the other surveillance in modern cars but draw the line at a passive BAC detector that would stop the car from starting. What might that imply about what they really really want to hide.
muh right to drive drunk
Yeah, clearly that will be the only thing to come from this level of over reach. Clearly as long as your not doing anything untoward you have nothing to fear. Pre judgment of crime before it is committed just makes sense right?
woe is me, my car wont start when I’m drunk. I am so oppressed
Or your car will not start when you use the wrong mouthwash, or when you are the designated driver, or when in an emergency on the way to the hospital after using rubbing alcohol. Or you are drunk and get in your car for whatever reason and the doors lock and call the police when you had no intention of driving.
Or and here’s a fun one, not wanting to be treated like a fucking criminal with a item you paid many tens of thousands for!
And all that is off the top of my head before getting into the nightmare of who gets the data.
damn that sounds like valid concerns to raise if this tech was real and being implemented and you actually had real examples.
I bet this stuff that doesn’t exist would have a 5000% false positive rate and be based on a little camera drone that pops out of the car and follows you around to watch you to see when you drink
We have today a massive issue just with cameras in cars (remember when Tesla got caught watching people fuck in their home?). You rolling out the red carpet to have even more dystopian shit in the future is silly, and here let’s turn this around, if those technologic evils are not at risk of being made real, then why the fuck do you care that people are upset about a law mandating them in cars? Are you the outrage police?
The only thing the proposed regulation requires is passive BAC detection and preventing cars from operating above the legal limit. That still seems fine to me. The regulation would not require that information to leave the vehicle. Every new car is ALREADY recording a shit ton of stuff that isn’t your BAC and providing it to anyone who wants to buy it.
This is the dumbest possible place to draw the line.
Passive bac detection… And you after all this think that means anything not ripped right from a dystopian story written to warn us never to do the stupid thing you seem to want?
I don’t let my car record anything I do, and I am not forced to yet. No one at this time is forced into the nightmare, but if this shit becomes law they will be.
what part of this law would require you to buy a new car
No one is arguing for that, you’re being dishonest.
Bull. Shit.
This regulation does not exist beyond the concept of ‘cars shouldn’t start if they detect that you’re drunk’. Either they’re ignoring the actual directive to the NHTSA and using it as a surrogate to get mad at the concept of surveillance or arguing that a theoretical car that can tell you’re drunk should let you drive it anyway.
I mean I am getting pissed because it’s mostly the first one. People credulous enough to read this yahoo story and not get suspicious of ‘driver cameras in every car STARTING NEXT YEAR connected to AI that will decide if the car starts’. like yeah I probably would have first heard of this now and from a tiny article on yahoo that self-contradicts and doesn’t have any sources, seems legit. Or they literally just read the headline and they let the confirmation bias wash over them.
I thought the ragebait part of the yahoo post was so obviously bullshit that it wasn’t even worth calling out at first but apparently every lemming just took it at face value and thinks I’m defending ‘AI camera watching you and sending live video to fbi’.
Please point to someone saying I want to drive drunk. Surely you can find one.
I guess nothing is implied by saying ‘a fictional car that can tell you’re drunk should let you drunk drive’ or saying ‘my BAC behind the wheel is my business and nobody elses’
Please find me someone who wants to drive drunk.
Find me a good reason that cars should start for people who are drunk.
“I deserve to be able to hide, very specifically, my BAC from an inanimate object that would only prevent me from starting a car while drunk. I pinky swear I have a reason to want this other than wanting to drive drunk” come on
Basic rights? Not being considered guilty in advance? Come now this is just getting silly.
You should just turn yourself in for diddiling children as we are making up quotes no one said as you clearly have the ability to be a child preditor and all that. Actually let’s just install a device that checks your arousal every time a child is within 50 meters of you, I mean unless you can find me a good reason why you should be able to live as a child molester.
wow imagine if you didn’t have the right to operate a car. they might even make you put yourself in a database and put some kind of identifiable marking on the outside of your car.
Please find me someone who wants to drive drunk.
Find me a good reason that cars should start for people who are drunk.
“I deserve to be able to hide, very specifically, my BAC from an inanimate object that would only prevent me from starting a car while drunk. I pinky swear I have a reason to want this other than wanting to drive drunk” come on
try real fucking hard. Why would somebody be fine with all of the other surveillance in modern cars but draw the line at a passive BAC detector that would stop the car from starting. What might that imply about what they really really want to hide.