2027 cars spying on you

I saw some doomer posts on X regarding this topic and how the new features would kick in if you looked crazy because you needed to use the car for an emergency and it would lock up because it felt you were not in a good frame of mind to be driving.

My Tesla currently watches me like a hawk. But the latest software releases seem to be making an assessment of whether the current traffic conditions require full attention or not. It seemed to allow me to check my phone without complaining like it used to.

When I saw the posts this morning it made me wonder how these restrictions would be implemented when my Tesla gets to the point of driving itself (which it is very close to doing now). My being in a good condition to drive would not really be in the picture in the case of true self driving, like the 27 Robotaxi's are doing now.
 
As long as any systems that can disable a car are reliable, I am all for it.
You may be the safest driver in the world, the other folks on the road aren’t.
As someone who’s next door neighbor was killed by a drunk driver, I fully support this life saving technology.
 
Zathras said:
As someone who’s next door neighbor was killed by a drunk driver, I fully support this life saving technology.
Click to expand...

A lot of people are about to learn that buzzed driving is drunk driving if this technology is implemented.

If folks don't like the car's decision, take a rideshare, have a sober person drive, or walk...
 
Hmmm...after my last foot surgery my ride couldn't make it when it was time to get the stitches out.

So I had to hop on the knee scooter, make my way to the rear of my Suburban, open up the lift-gate, lever myself inside, pull the scooter in with me there in the back, then crawl over two rows to the driver's seat.

Wonder if a vehicle with this new system would have let me drive after seeing all that. :)
 
audreyh1 said:
At least I don’t have to turn a key or push a button for that. 🤣🤣
Click to expand...
+1

When our daughter moved back to England she needed to pass a UK driving test (this was 2023). She had bought a VW id.3 and took her test in that. I sat with her on the drive to the test center and waited while she was taken out on the road. When she returned I watched her talking with the driving examiner and asked her what they were talking about. She said that the examiner told her to turn off the car and she explained that she could press the start button but the examiner would not notice anything as the power did not turn off until she exited the car. The examiner told her that she was the first person in an EV that he had ever tested.
 
One of our vehicles is an EV. It's the most reliable vehicle we've ever owned and it also requires the least maintenance.

IYKYK
 
I skimmed through most of this thread. Did nobody call BS on this article? Well I am.

A touch sensor in the Start button of your car that can detect alcohol through your skin? Sorry, I don't believe it.

A passive sensor in the steering column that draws in the exhaled breath and directs infrared light beams on the breath sample and analyzes the wavelengths returned to determine the presence of alcohol. BS.

This stuff is a defense lawyer's dream, if it were true. False positives, non-calibrated units, etc.
 
Well I think some people including myself have added reality which is...the provision in the bill is real and 2027 is the actual "deadline" for implementation.

But the technology isn't anywhere near ready or tested. The deadline will have to be extended or the powers that be will have to repeal that requirement.

So far, none of that has happened. Model year 2027 is already here and those cars don't include or have the technology.
 
Mr. Tightwad said:
If I was a bank robber or fentanyl seller, I'd pass on getting monitored.

Otherwise, why would I care. Some will shout "Government snooping" or "My rights".
Click to expand...
Most of us don't sell fentanyl or rob banks. But who here NEVER exceeds the speed limit? Who here ALWAYS comes to a complete stop at every stop-sign, looks both ways, and only then proceeds forward? Most people don't vituperatively flaunt the law, but also, most cut corners, let things slip, take shortcuts and so on.

Computers don't make subjective judgment calls. Computers don't let things slide. Computers don't attend to mitigating or extenuating circumstances. Exceed the speed limit by 5 mph? Nailed! Roll through a stop sign at 2 mph? Nailed! Put pedantically enough, and we're all criminals.

This normally doesn't matter, because the offenses are mild. and there's surfeit of greater offenders to be prosecuted. Plus, we can't put 250 million people in jail. And so, highway traffic moves 10-12 mph above the posted speed limit. The only drivers getting pulled over are the weavers who go 30 mph over. Grandma is fine in the middle lane, doing 73 in a 65 zone. But if grandma's car has enough computerization and enough monitoring, grandma is going to get a ticket in the mail (or e-mail)... and eventually a court-summons to take away her license.
 
Isn't that taking things a bit far, sliding down the proverbial "slippery slope" when we don't need to?

The technology proposed is basically if you're intoxicated, the car won't start. It's not designed to call the police. You're absolutely right that the car could be designed to call the police, but there aren't enough resources to handle those calls and arrest every single person and there never will be.

Grandma isn't going to have her license taken away for speeding habitually a few miles per hour over. The most likely evolution of proposed safety nannyism is a dynamic speed governor in the car that won't let it be driven in excess of posted speed limits. Cars can already "read" speed limit signs (literally) or infer data from GPS location. Our EV semi-autonomously drives and you can tell it to exceed the speed limit. It will let us -- for now -- but that doesn't mean the ban hammer of the law isn't coming down to mandate electronic speed governance soon.

Nobody is going to jail, but the car will no longer do a comfortable 5-7mph over posted speeds.
 
TheWizard said:
If the 1960s ever come back, you'll be ALL SET!!
Click to expand...
Indeed. I never cared for computers, other than as giant clunky calculation-engines to solve differential equations or to record reams of data. Circa 1970 is about the level of Information Technology development that I find to be the optimum between complexity and utility. Banks and universities would have mainframes, addressed by time-sharing. Individual users would have typewriters at home. Engineers would write code in Fortran, to be executed on the mainframe.

With cars, I acknowledge the benefit of some 1970s technologies, or at least mass-market concepts that didn't make it into cars until the 1970s... four wheel disk brakes, transistorized ignition, rack and pinion steering (with or without hydraulic assist), vacuum-servos on brakes, intermittent windshield wipers, overdrive transmissions with full synchronization.
 
G-Money said:
Isn't that taking things a bit far, sliding down the proverbial "slippery slope" when we don't need to?

The technology proposed is basically if you're intoxicated, the car won't start. It's not designed to call the police. You're absolutely right that the car could be designed to call the police, but there aren't enough resources to handle those calls and arrest every single person and there never will be.

Grandma isn't going to have her license taken away for speeding habitually a few miles per hour over. The most likely evolution of proposed safety nannyism is a dynamic speed governor in the car that won't let it be driven in excess of posted speed limits. Cars can already "read" speed limit signs (literally) or infer data from GPS location. Our EV semi-autonomously drives and you can tell it to exceed the speed limit. It will let us -- for now -- but that doesn't mean the ban hammer of the law isn't coming down to mandate electronic speed governance soon.

Nobody is going to jail, but the car will no longer do a comfortable 5-7mph over posted speeds.
Click to expand...
Accurate speed limit reading still has a ways to go. From GPS data/nav I often see the wrong speed limit displayed. From sign reading it occasionally doesn’t read it or gets it wrong. It’s improved a lot but still not 100% accurate. As the driver I’m still responsible for knowing what it is. I have the car configured to chime me when it thinks I’m going 5 mph over the speed limit, but it doesn’t enforce any max speed.
 
Accurate speed limit reading is certainly not accurate here either. School zones showing 20mph only when lights are flashing or at certain times of the day fool our car cameras all the time.

And that is just one example of many.
 
Wow, I'll never be able to pass someone on a 2 lane hwy. I like to get around them quickly and will often exceed the speed limit by a bunch when passing.
 
The newest vehicle I drive is 20+ years old, and I will do everything I can to avoid these sorts of bloated tech vehicles as long as possible. It's also just one more thing that can go wrong with a costly infotainment repair, as that has become more and more of a failure point costing thousands of dollars.

For every one technological addition (I have to admit the backup cameras are nice IF they aren't overly relied upon which can cost someone an accident if the camera misses a car behind at the right angle), there are several that I have found that are annoying, intrusive, and one more thing that can go wrong.
 
To turn this around a bit, if all cars were self driving, the speed limits could be set (electronically, no need for signs) to actually be reasonable. Instead of setting them artificially low because nobody goes the posted speed.

This exposes one absurd aspect of our current system. Our highways were designed for much higher speeds than currently posted. And, weather permitting, it's perfectly safe to go a lot faster. But since the advent of speed radar, that became the most convenient law to enforce. We have built a whole culture around the idea that this is the one and only safety issue we as a society need to worry about.

There is a two-lane highway near me which follows the route of an old railroad line. Straight as an arrow, perfectly level. Wide, paved shoulders, good visibility on both sides. When I was first learning to drive (before the national 55 limit) it was posted at 60MPH. Perfectly reasonable, but of course it's down to 40 and 50 MPH now. It's a major connecting route used by commuters.

Then they built a high school on a side road off the highway. The school is probably at least a quarter-mile away from the highway, past some parking lots and fields, with some trees in between. It's in a rural area. Nobody walks to school. They either drive their own cars, or take the bus.

Yet every day, twice a day, around rush hour, the "15MPH School Zone" lights flash.

This is among the most asinine things I've seen. Nobody has ever seen a kid anywhere near the road. And frankly, if you make it to high school and haven't learned not to play in traffic, you've got bigger problems.

This is what we've come to. It needs to stop. If self-driving cars are the only way, sign me up.
 
CaptTom said:
To turn this around a bit, if all cars were self driving, the speed limits could be set (electronically, no need for signs) to actually be reasonable. Instead of setting them artificially low because nobody goes the posted speed.

This exposes one absurd aspect of our current system. Our highways were designed for much higher speeds than currently posted. And, weather permitting, it's perfectly safe to go a lot faster. But since the advent of speed radar, that became the most convenient law to enforce. We have built a whole culture around the idea that this is the one and only safety issue we as a society need to worry about.

There is a two-lane highway near me which follows the route of an old railroad line. Straight as an arrow, perfectly level. Wide, paved shoulders, good visibility on both sides. When I was first learning to drive (before the national 55 limit) it was posted at 60MPH. Perfectly reasonable, but of course it's down to 40 and 50 MPH now. It's a major connecting route used by commuters.

Then they built a high school on a side road off the highway. The school is probably at least a quarter-mile away from the highway, past some parking lots and fields, with some trees in between. It's in a rural area. Nobody walks to school. They either drive their own cars, or take the bus.

Yet every day, twice a day, around rush hour, the "15MPH School Zone" lights flash.

This is among the most asinine things I've seen. Nobody has ever seen a kid anywhere near the road. And frankly, if you make it to high school and haven't learned not to play in traffic, you've got bigger problems.

This is what we've come to. It needs to stop. If self-driving cars are the only way, sign me up.
Click to expand...
School zones near me are "on" all day regardless of student presence. Has always seemed very stupid since no one is there.
 
folivier said:
Wow, I'll never be able to pass someone on a 2 lane hwy. I like to get around them quickly and will often exceed the speed limit by a bunch when passing.
Click to expand...
In Montana, one can legally exceed the posted speed limit by 10mph when passing on a 2 lane highway.
 
CaptTom said:
This exposes one absurd aspect of our current system. Our highways were designed for much higher speeds than currently posted. And, weather permitting, it's perfectly safe to go a lot faster. But since the advent of speed radar, that became the most convenient law to enforce. We have built a whole culture around the idea that this is the one and only safety issue we as a society need to worry about.
Click to expand...
Not sure about the original design-speed of highways, but it's a safe assumption that the original design assumed the vehicles at the time. Our highway system dates from the early 1960s. What was the handling, braking, maneuvering, acceleration and so on, of early 1960s passenger cars? One supposes that for all of the muscle-car hoopla, a 1963 Mercury or Buick or whatever, stopped more sluggishly than what's driven today. It was worse at accident-avoidance, and much worse at accident-survival. And yet, there we (or our forebears) were, somehow managing the conditions of the times.

Also, highways are supposed to handle 18-wheelers, right? How maneuverable are those? What's their braking-performance?

If we design to the common denominator - and it would be ludicrous not to - well then, what's the implication for 2026-era passenger cars?
 
Diogenes said:
Not sure about the original design-speed of highways, but it's a safe assumption that the original design assumed the vehicles at the time.
Click to expand...
The highways were designed during a time when cars were considered a cornerstone of "The American Way." At that time, cars were getting faster and safer every year. It was assumed this would continue. Careful planning went into designing the interstate system. Due consideration was given to limiting access and making everything from guardrails to bridge abutments either impact-absorbing or deflecting. I've heard that the design speeds were well in excess of what most highways are posted at today, even with modern, safer cars.

Fast forward to today. Cars are evil, and must be stopped. Every intersection needs a stop sign, even where traffic is light and sight lines are unrestricted. Red lights at all but the busiest intersections force cars to stop even when no-one is coming, consuming fuel, wearing out brakes and delaying travel for no reason. Speed limits are always lowered, never raised.
 
The population of the US has increased significantly since most of our road infrastructure was designed. There are a lot more people using the roads.

What's happening isn't so much a "war on cars", it's infrastructure adaptation to high numbers of varied uses while trying to ensure safety for the most vulnerable (pedestrians).
 
freedomatlast said:
Just going from bias ply to radial tires alone was a huge step forward in increasing the handling and braking ability of cars and trucks.
Click to expand...
And reliability! Tires of today are amazing devices compared to the tires of 60 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom