I can’t. I just can’t.

  • Archr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    5 days ago

    Last year I drove my parent’s car which is equipped with one of these cameras that determine if the driver is distracted or dozing. And I can say for certain that it works. I honestly wish that my car had this sort of a system.

    I view this tech like a padlock. Sure some people will do whatever they can to get around it, but it keeps honest people honest. If it can reduce deaths on the road from drunk and tired drivers even by a little bit then isn’t that worth it?

    I’m not sure what you mean by not being able to follow up… Driving drunk and killing someone is already punished harshly, and you can even follow up civilly; it’s called a wrongful death suit.

      • Archr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        What about their proposed solution requires any of this data to leave the vehicle?

        • dreamkeeper@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          The law says nothing about keeping the data in the vehicle, so it will 100% be sent outside the vehicle. Most modern cars already transmit your data so why would they change anything?

          • Archr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            You are right. Because the law says nothing about the requirements. They haven’t decided on them yet. Come back when they propose something.

            • dreamkeeper@literature.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              If the law says nothing then you can 100% count on this data being sold to third parties. Again, they’re already doing it. They aren’t going to stop unless the government explicitly stops them.

              Also, they haven’t decided yet? The law was passed in 2021. It only comes into effect in 2027. This isn’t a proposal, is the law right now.

              • Archr@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                The law that was passed just requires the NHTSA to create requirements. The law itself does not mandate that auto manufacturers do anything relating to this (it might have other items for them but I didn’t read the full bill). The NHTSA says that the technology that they are looking at is just not ready/accurate enough to be enforced.

                100% auto manufacturers are selling that data. As you said there is no law stopping them. We should fight for data privacy rights across the country. But that is not really what this article is talking about. They are talking about government surveillance which we should also fight against. But I doubt that auto manufacturers are just going to put a government backdoor in just because.

            • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 days ago

              And so long as they aren’t proposing privacy protections, I will continue to raise a stink about it. Modern cars already share way too much of our private data.

    • munk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      It doesn’t work on everyone. These systems have trouble with certain eye shapes, eye makeup, etc.

      • Archr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I think the NHTSA is more looking at detecting alcohol on the driver’s breath passively. But yes, there will always be cases where technology does not work optimally.

    • anotherandrew@lemmy.mixdown.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Last year I drove my parent’s car which is equipped with one of these cameras that determine if the driver is distracted or dozing. And I can say for certain that it works.

      I rented two different modern (2015-2016) Mercedes SUVs. They both had systems that detected tired/inattentive driving. I was neither but after several hours on the road both vehicles would alert that it was time to take a break with a nice little coffee icon. I was conversing with a passenger, driving fine, not wandering between lanes/etc… The first time I kind of doubted myself but subsequent notifications both the passenger and myself were agreeing that we had no idea what it was upset about.

      The newer car had another sensor that would get upset if your grip on the steering wheel got too light. That was kind of neat to see how much leeway it’d give you before it got antsy.

      • Archr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Probably because you were driving for a few hours. That makes sense. You may not feel it but driving is an active task that takes more effort than just sitting in a chair.

        I would much rather have this system have false positives rather than not have it at all.