Technology

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

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

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?

Time to buy a Daimler-Benz W123 240D (OM616) with 53 kW (72 hp) and a 4-spd manual. Yep, that's all I need.

What if you tape the camera ?

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.

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.

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.

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

And politicians in germany are wondering why the car industry is collapsing. Ain't nobody can afford those european cars if there are a gajillion unnecessary regulations making cars obnoxiously expensive. And slapping massive tarrifs on Chinese cars which are a lot cheaper kills the remaining incentive to buy a new car, especially when nowadays it is necessary to reduce the amount of ICE cars and accelerate adoption of EVs. Dumb fckn politicians.

I'd rather have the option for a factory installed dashcam or at least a mount for me to install one.

The primary purpose of AI systems is mass surveillance.