Poll of the Day > #BigBroALERT: New Fed Law to introduce 'Kill Switches' in all new Cars...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://autos.yahoo.com/law-install-kill-switches-cars-170000930.html

You think this is Gov't overreach/invasion of privacy? (Poll Question)

This is BS

This is an entirely speculative article written by an ill-informed car guy based on speculation written by a man who tried to overthrow the results of a lawful election.

The idea that if your car thinks you are driving impaired on a highway and your entire vehicle will shut down in the road is so laughable I cant believe anybody takes anything else in the article remotely seriously.

I can't imagine anyone actively thinking this is a good idea for their car to have this feature. In a world where hackers do not exist or malfunctions do not occur, yeah I guess this would be a good idea. But sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

Not every single thing in life needs to be regulated.

kangolcone posted...

The idea that if your car thinks you are driving impaired on a highway and your entire vehicle will shut down in the road is so laughable I cant believe anybody takes anything else in the article remotely seriously.

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

Breathalyzer locks have been a thing for a while. They prevent the start-up of a car, not force it to shutdown.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

We have those in the US.

Anyways on topic this won't go anywhere. People aren't willing to let hackers shut their car down in the middle of no where. Or I mean hell it could even bring back bandits if they can track people and shut them down in nice places for ambush.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Breathalyzer locks have been a thing for a while. They prevent the start-up of a car, not force it to shutdown.

And it's wildly invasive and unimaginable yet it still happened, so how is a kill switch a shocker? Tesla already does it to customers because fuck you.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

And it's wildly invasive and unimaginable yet it still happened, so how is a kill switch a shocker? Tesla already does it to customers because fuck you.

A car not starting is just a car not starting. Forcing a car to shut down can be extremely dangerous.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

A car not starting is just a car not starting. Forcing a car to shut down can be extremely dangerous.

Not with modern cars with ESC and lane keep as standard, it's really safe.

Whatever extra features are involved to make it less dangerous, shutting down a vehicle mid-operation is still going to be a lot more dangerous than simply not letting drunk people start their cars.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

And it's wildly invasive and unimaginable yet it still happened, so how is a kill switch a shocker? Tesla already does it to customers because fuck you.

Don't drive drunk and a judge won't order it in your car.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Don't drive drunk and a judge won't order it in your car.

It's mandatory for all new cars from 2022 in the EU.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It's mandatory for all new cars from 2022 in the EU.

A quick Google makes it clear the EU just requires that they could be easily installed in new cars.

Which probably means the few countries that tried them as a requirement after drunk driving considered it to work well enough to prevent recurrence.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

I'm all for it

Nichtcrawler X posted...

A quick Google makes it clear the EU just requires that they could be easily installed in new cars.

Which probably means the few countries that tried them as a requirement after drunk driving considered it to work well enough to prevent recurrence.

This. They're not mandating they be installed in every production vehicle. Just that every production vehicle have the capability to have them installed.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


While I understand the why, I wonder what measures are in place to guarantee that incapacitation of the car is safe.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

A car that won't start up for a drunk driver is very, very different than a car that shuts down in the middle of the road if it thinks the driver is impaired.

No, this isn't particularly believable. Not at this stage. Get back to me when self-driving vehicles are more widespread.

Looked it up. It gives a warning signal of sorts and requires a retest after stopping the car yourself.

I would assume not doing the retest in a given amount of time would send a signal to the police or something.

Edit: or just make it impossible to start after stopping without action from the car company, which I would assume would involve law enforcement.

I sure hope nobody uses this illegally! That would be bad!

kangolcone posted...

This is an entirely speculative article written by an ill-informed car guy based on speculation written by a man who tried to overthrow the results of a lawful election.

The idea that if your car thinks you are driving impaired on a highway and your entire vehicle will shut down in the road is so laughable I cant believe anybody takes anything else in the article remotely seriously.

While you can bullshit all you want, this is almost certainly the direction the technology is going. And when it's implemented, there will very likely be ways to either handle a highway shutdown or -- more likely -- they'll simply wait for them to leave the highway before initiating the shutdown.

And while that should concern any citizen with a healthy understanding of government excess, the *much* bigger issue is that any backdoor the government adds to a system can and will be exploited by criminals. And keep in mind they've repeatedly tried to do this in other areas:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-congress-insight/spy-agency-ducks-questions-about-back-doors-in-tech-products-idUSKBN27D1CS

sodium-chloride posted...

I can't imagine anyone actively thinking this is a good idea for their car to have this feature.

Unfortunately, the US government isn't big on good ideas when it comes to citizens' rights.

All these mentions of back door spying I been spying on every member of the US Intelligence community moms back doors for years now suck on that FBI lmao

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The EU is literally introducing breathalyser starters in the near future, it's very believable.

Lets see. A car not starting because the operator is intoxicated versus a car shutting down while going 65 with no warning and surrounded by other cars. One of these will literally prevent an accident. One of these would cause accidents.

The idea and your comparison are both absurd.

Zeus posted...

While you can bullshit all you want, this is almost certainly the direction the technology is going. And when it's implemented, there will very likely be ways to either handle a highway shutdown or -- more likely -- they'll simply wait for them to leave the highway before initiating the shutdown.

And while that should concern any citizen with a healthy understanding of government excess, the *much* bigger issue is that any backdoor the government adds to a system can and will be exploited by criminals. And keep in mind they've repeatedly tried to do this in other areas:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-congress-insight/spy-agency-ducks-questions-about-back-doors-in-tech-products-idUSKBN27D1CS

Unfortunately, the US government isn't big on good ideas when it comes to citizens' rights.

The author of the article states cars would shut down in the middle of driving. That idea is ludicrous.

Secondly, its interesting that you think a car randomly shutting down is only an issue on a highway. Have you never driven on a Saturday night in a major city? But sure, Im positive cars are just going to stop on 5th and 23rd in NYC. Wont be any safety issues there.

This is why old cars are king especially pre-2003 models, little to nothing to hack by the Feds, trolls, terrorists, and evil regimes such as the CCP and thus little to no chance of death by hacked car.

Hop103 posted...

This is why old cars are king especially pre-2003 models, little to nothing to hack by the Feds, trolls, terrorists, and evil regimes such as the CCP and thus little to no chance of death by hacked car.

What has the chance of death by hacked car been for 2003-2021 models?

adjl posted...

What has the chance of death by hacked car been for 2003-2021 models?

Pretty low for cars made at or before 2011, basically you want a car without a ton of online features or wi-fi capability.

Hop103 posted...

Pretty low for cars made at or before 2011, basically you want a car without a ton of online features or wi-fi capability.

"Pretty low" isn't exactly a useful figure for risk analysis. While you're digging for numbers, you might also want to look for statistics on what has happened to overall vehicle-related fatalities so you can properly analyze whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks.

Even if a car was hacked it would just be covered up by the company.

Zeus posted...

While you can bullshit all you want, this is almost certainly the direction the technology is going. And when it's implemented, there will very likely be ways to either handle a highway shutdown or -- more likely -- they'll simply wait for them to leave the highway before initiating the shutdown.

And while that should concern any citizen with a healthy understanding of government excess, the *much* bigger issue is that any backdoor the government adds to a system can and will be exploited by criminals. And keep in mind they've repeatedly tried to do this in other areas:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-congress-insight/spy-agency-ducks-questions-about-back-doors-in-tech-products-idUSKBN27D1CS

Unfortunately, the US government isn't big on good ideas when it comes to citizens' rights.

It's @Zeus the guy that spouts bullshit like it's going out of business. Just ignore him and don't respond to his posts.

kangolcone posted...

The author of the article states cars would shut down in the middle of driving. That idea is ludicrous.

Provided the system warns people of a shutdown and the cops have a visual, it's very viable. Nobody is proposing what you think is happening -- a blind shutdown when a car may or may not be operating (although hackers might do that).

You're basically suggesting the most ridiculous way something could work while saying it couldn't work that way, despite the fact nobody suggesting it will work how you describe.

kangolcone posted...

Secondly, its interesting that you think a car randomly shutting down is only an issue on a highway. Have you never driven on a Saturday night in a major city? But sure, Im positive cars are just going to stop on 5th and 23rd in NYC. Wont be any safety issues there.

It's interesting how you keep going back to "randomly shutting off" when that's not what they're suggesting at all.

adjl posted...

What has the chance of death by hacked car been for 2003-2021 models?

Any care with a heavily electronic system has that chance. The smarter the car, the easier it is to remotely interfere with its functioning because there's more to manipulate.

Zeus posted...

Any care with a heavily electronic system has that chance. The smarter the car, the easier it is to remotely interfere with its functioning because there's more to manipulate.

Sure, but what has the chance been? It's hard to analyze a risk when all you've done is state it as a hypothetical, after all, and merely introducing the hypothetical possibility does nothing to suggest that it presents a greater danger than would be made up for by the safety benefits of smarter cars.

My car has a kill switch option. You have to go through a bunch of hoops to utilize it. It was marketed as a way of stopping people who had stolen your vehicle. I never used it, but was told it would gradually slow your car, until it stopped and won't start back up again. Then activate GPS so police could find it. Might be nice in a higher crime area. I don't see it getting a lot of use though.

Zeus posted...

Provided the system warns people of a shutdown and the cops have a visual, it's very viable. Nobody is proposing what you think is happening -- a blind shutdown when a car may or may not be operating (although hackers might do that).

You're basically suggesting the most ridiculous way something could work while saying it couldn't work that way, despite the fact nobody suggesting it will work how you describe.

It's interesting how you keep going back to "randomly shutting off" when that's not what they're suggesting at all.

Any care with a heavily electronic system has that chance. The smarter the car, the easier it is to remotely interfere with its functioning because there's more to manipulate.

What do you think a kill switch with passive monitoring would do other than turn the car off?

kangolcone posted...

What do you think a kill switch with passive monitoring would do other than turn the car off?

Basically all new cars now have a means for the car to interfere with each wheel individuallly, cut the engine and adjust your steering, there's no need for passivity

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Basically all new cars now have a means for the car to interfere with each wheel individuallly, cut the engine and adjust your steering, there's no need for passivity

It does not appear you read the article.