[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by alex2364

Some rando on the internet makes a claim so it must be true, right?

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-402773429497

welcome to 2023 where most people get their news from Twitter and Youtube which never has whacko conspiracy loving idiots on there spreading misinformation to rile up all the sheep who lap it all up

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

welcome to 2023 where most people get their news from Twitter and Youtube which never has whacko conspiracy loving idiots on there spreading misinformation to rile up all the sheep who lap it all up

Maybe if you took the time to read the thread you wouldn't embarrass yourself
There are plenty of excellent sources about the original legislation and the law to over ride the bill but you be you.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

welcome to 2023 where most people get their news from Twitter and Youtube which never has whacko conspiracy loving idiots on there spreading misinformation to rile up all the sheep who lap it all up

So the "technology" detects the driver is impared and pulls the car over to the side of the road, hopefully in a safe spot. Then the technology will not let the car move or be driven further. That sounds like a kill switch. A "soft kill switch" describes it best.

Well, then what happens? The car is sitting on the side of the road with the flashers on? That pretty much gets the attention of the police. The police find the (drunk) driver behind the wheel and arrest him for DUI. At trial, what evidence will the police use to support their DUI arrest? Well, of course it will be the driver monitoring data captured in the DMCM (Driver Monitoring Control Module). What else would the police have as evidence to suspect the driver of operating the vehicle while impared; it's called "probable cause". So yes, the police will have access to the data, not to shut the car off, but to make a DUI conviction.

Perhaps politicians should read the Constitution.

[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Maybe if you took the time to read the thread you wouldn't embarrass yourself
There are plenty of excellent sources about the original legislation and the law to over ride the bill but you be you.

did i hit a nerve ?



it is a generalization of today's society that belive everything they see on social media or the internet ...relax

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

So the "technology" detects the driver is impared and pulls the car over to the side of the road, hopefully in a safe spot. Then the technology will not let the car move or be driven further. That sounds like a kill switch. A "soft kill switch" describes it best.

So it's midnight and you are driving through Center City, Philadelphia and due to road construction you drive over a bunch of painted lines due to redirections. Your impaired driver systems is triggered and your car kicks into limp home mode and you are warned you have 1 mile to pull over. What could possibly go wrong?

[Sebis]

This is such a bad idea I cannot comprehend how a sane individual would agree to drive with this “technology “ in the car.

I work in software development and I can guarantee there are going to be many system failures that will eventually cause accidents or even fatalities. Not to speak of the constitutional aspect in the US.

[Car-Addicted]

Fact-Checkers Are Gaslighting You on the Feds’ Vehicle ‘Kill Switch’ Mandate
“The right to travel is fundamental, but the government has mandated a kill-switch in new vehicles sold after 2026,” said Massie. “The kill-switch will monitor driver performance and disable cars based on the information gathered.”
Sec. 24220 of the law explicitly states: “[T]o ensure the prevention of alcohol-impaired driving fatalities, advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology must be standard equipment in all new passenger motor vehicles.”
The legislation then goes on to define the technology as a computer system that can “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle” and can “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected” .

https://www.aier.org/article/fact-ch...witch-mandate/

Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments, the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from the acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the constituents.
James Madison

[///d]

"I work for the government. I'm here to help."

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by ///d

"I work for the government. I'm here to help."

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona is that you?

[gonzo]

^
Good grief that was humiliating. From Edu brass, no less.

[Car-Addicted]

I told you so

Bozo's Kill Switch: The Growing Threat of Government Control of Your Car

[/ / / M3]

Originally Posted by Shredicus

Is this really that big of a deal if you're not a criminal?

Yes, because the idiots who write these laws rarely think about possible unintended consequences.

[hihowareyougood]

There definitely are societal benefits from this, but it opens a whole new can of worms as you all already pointed out so eloquently. But regardless of anyone's stance on this issue, people will find a way to circumvent kill switches. I expect that it'll be similar to ECU speed limiters, albeit maybe more complicated depending on how automakers tie it in to the car. Criminals will pay a few hundred bucks to a tuner to deactivate the nannies, then rob a store and start a high speed freeway pursuit or something and we can all watch daily on live TV just how useful the kill switch was at the cost of our privacy.

Despite the example above, I'm still undecided on this as of now since I need more time to research and not just knee-jerk react to headlines. However, a part of me is also just being realistic as to how this all may play out.

If anyone hates it that much, you can always just stick to pre-2026 cars? F87 for life, right?

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

I'm sure people will call me crazy, but every major event that has occurred has been orchestrated by the government, especially true when it leads to an erosion of "rights"

I don't think you're crazy, I just think you grossly overestimate the power of our government. I also think that you forget the fact that private sector tech is superior to government tech, so anything that's locked by the government, and I mean anything, can be unlocked in the private sector.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

I don't think you're crazy, I just think you grossly overestimate the power of our government. I also think that you forget the fact that private sector tech is superior to government tech, so anything that's locked by the government, and I mean anything, can be unlocked in the private sector.

But almost every private sector company that can unlock the tech does some level of work for the government. The Govenment can easily ban companies from being awarded government contracts or ban products from specific companies being used in Federal contracts.

Guess which hand these private sector companies won't bite...

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by hihowareyougood

But regardless of anyone's stance on this issue, people will find a way to circumvent kill switches. I expect that it'll be similar to ECU speed limiters, albeit maybe more complicated depending on how automakers tie it in to the car.

That's called tampering and the government takes a dim view of that. Which is why most current cars have locked ECU's. The manufacturers on the hook for their specification.

[TR930]

Originally Posted by chetrickerman

Its amazing how many people have this ignorant mindset. You may not be doing anything wrong now, but what happens when the people in power have changed their perspective and now view what you are doing as wrong?
My kids said the same thing when I brought up how invasive Tik-tok is on someone's phone, yet its not about whether or not you are doing something wrong, its about the fact that the government or private company has zero right to do this sort of thing. Same with the Patriot Act......

+1

[BlkGS]

All the people saying "lolz why are you afraid of the government invading your privacy" will all flip their shit the day another Republican becomes president about how they can't be trusted and will use this stuff to be tyrants. Especially if it's Trump.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

All the people saying "lolz why are you afraid of the government invading your privacy" will all flip their shit the day another Republican becomes president about how they can't be trusted and will use this stuff to be tyrants. Especially if it's Trump.

I doubt we would agree on politics but we should agree that the bigger the government and the more invasive that government becomes the worse it will be for all of us.

The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

But almost every private sector company that can unlock the tech does some level of work for the government. The Govenment can easily ban companies from being awarded government contracts or ban products from specific companies being used in Federal contracts.

Guess which hand these private sector companies won't bite...

I disagree. Some of these guys will do it for free, that's one of the beautiful things about the USA.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

But almost every private sector company that can unlock the tech does some level of work for the government. The Govenment can easily ban companies from being awarded government contracts or ban products from specific companies being used in Federal contracts.

Guess which hand these private sector companies won't bite...

Exactly. All these tech companies are arms of our government. They make the consumer version of the tech the government has developed 2-30 years ago.

Do people think it’s just coincidence that all these tech companies came out with AI at the same time, and only a few people have access to actual AI technologiesv

[2heeldrive]

On April 12th, The German Transport Minister, Volker Wissing, said “comprehensive and indefinite driving bans on Saturdays and Sundays,” may be needed to meet climate goals.

This is obviously not popular and I would think difficult to enforce. But, if the gov't has the ability to shut off your car anytime they want to... resistance is futile.