this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
355 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

87001 readers
3299 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1247209/all-cars-sold-in-the-eu-now-require-a-camera-aimed-at-your-face-its-still-not-clear-wher

Starting July 7, 2026, every new car sold in the European Union must include a driver monitoring camera aimed at your face. Glance at your phone, your kids in the back seat, or the radio for too long, and the car will flash a warning light and sound an alert.

Automakers have known this was coming for years. What they, and EU regulators, have never spelled out is what happens to that footage after the alert goes off.

While the intention behind the new system is difficult to dispute, its implementation has raised several concerns. Early real-world testing suggests the distraction warnings can be overly sensitive and potentially distracting.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 67 points 1 month ago (7 children)

So, a couple of things...

For a real time warning system, there's no need to actually record anything. Monitoring the video feed with no record capability should be fine.

Second, this sounds super easy yo defeat with a printed photo card and a couple of Googley Eyes. 👀

[–] Babalugats@feddit.uk 57 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

"Super Easy to Defeat" is the now. They don't care about that.

They just need you to accept it, and move along.

In a few years time, it will not be "super easy to defeat" but will be standard practice and accepted law.

By that stage it will likely be too late to do anything. They will have tied it in with chat control and all of our data.

Can you imagine the freedom that will be discovered 50 years from now in a trend, when people decide to ditch their personal devices and live like they used to 70, 80 years ago (maybe even 60).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

Clarkson was a step ahead of us this time.

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 19 points 1 month ago

Soon enough, If you defeat or try to defeat the government surveillance system, it will probably be against the law

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 60 points 1 month ago (4 children)

How many more years before me never owning a car and never driving is enough to put me on a list?

[–] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I won't own anything made after 2015... That's when LTE chips started becoming standard in cars...

I told my wife, my next car will have a carbuerator.

[–] PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 month ago (9 children)

A carburetor is a step too far, you invite misery, do you hate yourself? Take care, lol.

But yep would love to see more folks keeping old cars running, I won't be taking the plunge into "~mortgage and routinely operate my own bubble of dystopian hellscape", think I'ma pretty much lifetime "pass" on that flavor of nastiness.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 37 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Every new car. So congrats on further destroying the new car market, good job.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The primary purpose of AI systems is mass surveillance.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MantisToboggon@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Can you put tape over the camera.

[–] Screen_Shatter@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Or disconnect it? What happens when it no longer functions? Will I need to fix this to get my car to run again?

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I bet the system would sound an alarm if you did that.

[–] PabloSexcrowbar@piefed.social 10 points 1 month ago (10 children)

I'm willing to bet there's an ignition interlock that would keep the car from starting if the camera is disabled.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago (8 children)

This is for cars where everything is being put on touchscreens so you have to take your eyes off of the road to control it?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] stretch2m@infosec.pub 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No way in hell I'm buying a car with that BS. I'll ride a bike first.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (12 children)

Sounds like more ways for insurance companies to a) charge you more based on behaviors they arbitrarily determine are “bad”, and b) take your payments for years/decades then never pay out because they say something you did on video makes any accident your fault based on some term buried in the 500 page contract you obviously didn’t read all of.

They already do “a” by taking vehicle blackbox info uploaded by dealers or via telemetry and increasing your rate via their risk analysis. Note, your rates never go down for good driving. Only up.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] nullspace@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So if your teenager bangs their partner in the back seat do you sue your insurance or the automaker for recording child pornography?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

before long people are gonna want to buy nothing but used 70s and 80s carbuerated shitboxes just to avoid all this shit.

10 bucks says all this data is being fed back to insurance companies.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sunbeam60@feddit.uk 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Im sorry, but this is just silly.

If a camera rocords your face, it can be used to identity you. Thus it falls under GDPR regulations as PII. That requires that the footage is kept no longer than needed for its purpose and that what happens to the data is spelled out exactly. My car already comes with a privacy policy that you can read.

So the answer is: Anything that can be used to identify you will deleted - or rather it will never get stored.

And the reason this regulation doesn’t spell out what happens to the data is that it doesn’t need to because GDPR covers ALL data already.

The EU is guilty of many things, but this is solely about increasing driver awareness and preventing deaths and injury - and it’s working, with each generation of requirements, less people die.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unless it can prove that it is running entirely locally with no outside connection, it can fuck off.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Senal@programming.dev 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The mandate says nothing about cameras specifically.

I thought it did as well but it only specifies this :

Driver drowsiness and attention warning and advanced driver distraction warning systems shall be designed in such a way that those systems do not continuously record nor retain any data other than what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they were collected or otherwise processed within the closed-loop system. Furthermore, those data shall not be accessible or made available to third parties at any time and shall be immediately deleted after processing. Those systems shall also be designed to avoid overlap and shall not prompt the driver separately and concurrently or in a confusing manner where one action triggers both systems.

Don't get me wrong, manufacturers are going to have a fucking field day with all of the shit they'll try and get in under this banner of "safety" and they will almost certainly work their monetisation shenanigans in around this.

It might seem like that wording prohibits data collection, but it doesn't cover all the bases a team of well paid lawyers would be able to come up with. Or they could just do what they normally do and just ignore the "no data collection" part and pay the ~~cost of doing business tax~~ fine and rake in multiples of that fine in profits.

My point is , it doesn't specify cameras, so theoretically a company could come up with a non-face-scanning way of doing this and use that instead.

will they ?....fuck no...but they could if they wanted to.

Which is arguably worse.

edit : A note to say that I'm not arguing against the safety aspects of this , they might be fully valid, i'm arguing that it'll be abused for profit in any way the companies think will give them a positive ROI.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 1984@lemmy.today 10 points 1 month ago (7 children)

This was on the news today on tv and they showed a camera filming the driver, watching his upper body.

I bought a car from 2023 without all this shit so I'm very happy. Newer electric cars also beep when you go over the speed limit, which would drive me nuts.

[–] mastod0n@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

If anyone owns a current BMW and the speed limit beeping drives them nuts:

Hold the "set" button on you steering wheel for about 2s, the screen will inform you the Warnung has been temporarily turned off (until your next start)

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Score one more point for fucking bikes, Jesus...

Now about all those CCTVs

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 14 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I get so tired of bikes being brought up every time a car is mentioned. They're not at all an option for me or anyone who lives near me, and millions of others.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Nope, fuck-no, not even close. Never going to fucking happen. I have dashcams inside (pointed out) but I keep the mic muted because I don't need any of my ramblings recorded publicly.... (I also have it set not to record speed.. for obvious reasons)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] m8052@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (12 children)

What if you tape the camera ?

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] brownsugga@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Only buying pre 2018 cars from now on, I will have a Toyota collection that will run forever

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

My bet is all these devices in new cars will be all from one company. It will be up to automakers to put the cameras in the dash but the guts will all be the exact same. They will plug in the computer and all other sensors available. If the car doesn't have that sensor they can shut it off making these "brain" scalable.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›