New car surveillance tech becomes mandatory by 2027, using infrared cameras to monitor driver sobriety and alertness with privacy and cost concerns.
  • Turret3857@infosec.pubEnglish
    1·
    2 hours 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.

  • Wimster@lemmy.wtf
    15·
    16 hours 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.

    • anomnom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      7 hours ago

      My mom was using a tracker app to record her drives on her phone and when skiing. It recorded dozens of drives up and down the mountain.

      You can delete them or say it’s not you driving, but there were weeks of them and she easily could have missed some.

  • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
    8·
    17 hours 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.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.worldEnglish
    41·
    1 day 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.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      17·
      23 hours ago

      Imagine the car doing a full stop on the highway because of a bug splatter on the camera. False positives might even be lethal.

      • ulterno@programming.devEnglish
        7·
        15 hours 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.

  • JordanZ@lemmy.world
    30·
    1 day ago

    If the AI determines you’re impaired (blood alcohol ≥0.08% or showing fatigue), it can prevent ignition startup or limit vehicle speed.

    That should go well for my drives across -20F(-30C) degree areas. That first option could literally get someone killed at worst or cause some interesting problems at best. You’re tired and want to fill up before heading to the hotel? Now you’re stuck at the gas pump.

    False positives are going to be rampant. I remember the face tracking cameras that didn’t work at all for anybody that wasn’t Caucasian. I’d imagine there is going to be tons of lawsuits from accessibility groups when it misidentifies perfectly alert people due to some abnormality.

    • a4ng3l@lemmy.world
      10·
      20 hours 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.