"Your driving privacy expires with your current car’s lifespan"

[pomegranate_stew@kind.social]

@IanHill
I used to joke that my current car (13 years old) was the last car I’d be buying. Guess it wasn’t a joke.

[liquor_american@universeodon.com]

@pomegranate_stew @IanHill In the same boat here. I already didn't like all the touch screen bullshit in cars in 2013, but at least it wasn't all yet "upgraded" to be straight-up malware.

[ianhill@infosec.exchange]

@marsiposa I found this on the NHTSA site - https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-07/Report-to-Congress-Advanced-Impaired-Driving-Prevention-Technology_07-17-23.pdf

which contains the language

"NHTSA is working on the development of objective test method(s) to demonstrate the ability to measure a driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level passively and accurately. This area includes the development of proxy test tool(s) that could replicate the behavior of a typical person’s actions (breathing, touching, eye glaze etc.)"

and

"NHTSA is seeking information and researching on-road countermeasures that respond to driver impairment detections. These could include, but are not limited to, visual/auditory/haptic warnings, vehicle control interventions (i.e., speed reduction, stop in lane, stop on the shoulder, etc.), and ignition/transmission interlocks"

[fizzydaisies@mas.to]

@marsiposa @IanHill This article from January explains how efforts to block the law failed

https://reclaimthenet.org/house-vote-keeps-federal-kill-switch-vehicle-mandat

[raphaelmorgan@disabled.social]

@IanHill I do want to point out that "Your driving privacy expires with your current car’s lifespan" only applies to people buying *new* cars. Those of us who are too poor for that shit anyway, and those of us who have decided never to buy a new car (or never again) for environmental reasons will not be impacted by this until we can't find used cars older than 2027. Maintaining old cars is now even more important! We already need to for environmental reasons, but this is a great new motivation 😅

[ianhill@infosec.exchange]

@raphaelmorgan absolutely. As someone else implied on this thread, the price of 1996 Dodge Neon’s is about to go up. Same as non-smart non-IoT washing machines etc.

[ianto_jones@mastodon.social]

@IanHill glad I somewhat recently bought two cars, one several years older, and my partner's Subaru should last a long time. We're getting older and these *might* do it for us. If not we'll certainly buy older cars not affected by this Orwellian bullshit. Never would I submit to this horror story.

Seems likely to me that the Incompetent Horsemen of the Apocalypse are trying to burn down the automotive industry along with everything else.

[jesstheunstill@infosec.exchange]

@IanHill Let me guess, this means people with hooded eyes simply don't get to drive at all. Or what when a camera fails - is your car just a brick until you can afford a several thousand dollar repair? Because otherwise the system is defeated with a piece of tape. What the fuck.

[mossyrua@mastodon.ie]

@IanHill

Drive old Volvos!!

[wanderinghermit@mindly.social]

@IanHill

I'm 69, my newest vehicle is from 2014. I sincerely hope that the vehicle's lifespan and my lifespan expire at approximately the same time. I don't want to drive spyware.

This is, to me, a big block to getting an EV.

[srvanderplas@datavis.social]

@IanHill WTF. I'm sure they're going to test those algorithms on disabled people, people with chronic illnesses, and new parents. I'm sure that a tired mom will still be able to drive her sick infant to the ER and won't be stranded and have to rely on slow and expensive ambulance service, too. No way this could go wrong. No way someone will have to pay $30/month to enable this service so they can use their car.