SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The EU is moving forward with legislation to require ISA, Intelligent Speed Assistance, in all new cars starting in 2022. This system will use GPS, map databases, and speed limit reading cameras to limit speed. Speed limiting will be accomplished by limiting engine power. Drivers can temporarily override the system by pressing down hard on the accelerator. It seems that, at least to start, the system will have an off button. Other requirements of the legislation include a system to monitor the driver for drowsiness, and inattention, as well as standard hookups for in car breathalysers. It seems the driver monitoring systems may include in car cameras pointed at the driver.
Sources:
thisismoney.co.uk
fortune.com
euractiv.com
theengineer.co.uk
gizmodo.com
Previously on Soylent: Volvo: In-Car Cameras Will Monitor Drivers and Take Action to Prevent Distracted or Impaired Driving
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday March 28 2019, @06:33PM (11 children)
I'd say speed limiters are mostly fine in theory, though they would interfere with, for example, getting someone to the emergency room in a timely fashion. Waiting around for an ambulance can often take several times longer, especially in a rural or other poorly-served area. But speeding without proper training probably isn't going to help a whole lot, and could make things much worse.
It's the GPS tracking and probable internet connection for updates I would really worry about. Taken together, they allow for ubiquitous vehicle surveillance.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Codesmith on Thursday March 28 2019, @06:49PM (1 child)
I agree that GPS + network connection could lead to surveillance, but I think that ship has sailed.
I live in a city of 30k people, and we already have 4 police vehicles that have automated plate readers, and the public has had no information about whether the data from those devices is collated and stored. I've looked into to FoI request, but as it's municipal, I have to go to the next level up and that requires legal assistance and more money that I have handy.
Let's be fair, tying the red light cameras, traffic cameras and the plate readers would give them almost all of the data they want without requiring the auto manufacturer to be onside.
Pro utilitate hominum.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @10:14PM
Is it legal to block those systems from sending and receiving data? GPS and internet data that is.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday March 28 2019, @06:50PM (1 child)
Not worth the effort, when well over 90% of the people who can drive already carry a tracker in their pocket.
You shouldn't need a GPS-based limiter if you have a black box which records your speed. "God (your log) will get you if your fuck up" tends to work. GPS/galileo isn't perfect, and a bug in a limiter (out of date map?) could cause a pileup.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday March 28 2019, @07:21PM
>GPS/galileo isn't perfect, and a bug in a limiter (out of date map?) could cause a pileup.
Indeed. As could a normal error in GPS data - I can't tell you how many times I've had a GPS device insist that I'm driving on a nearby street paralleling the highway (or vice-versa)
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday March 28 2019, @06:51PM (3 children)
That's what the off switch is for.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday March 28 2019, @07:45PM (2 children)
Where's the off switch for the GPS and network connection?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @10:34PM (1 child)
In the fusebox.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @07:53AM
Hard wired so if it is disabled the engine won't start?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday March 28 2019, @11:55PM
Speed limiters and black boxes are simply a restriction of existing civil liberties. There are enough empty public roads in the US that people feel a freedom to speed due to lack of potential harm to others, lack of enforcement, and all around "that's how it has always been, why are you taking away my rights for no good reason?!!!"
Change of any status quo causes problems. WalMart installed black boxes in their semi-trucks and forced the drivers to stay at least 0.5mph below the posted speed at all times - which resulted in a situation where the WalMart trucks were traveling 10-15mph slower than most traffic, causing more harm than good as compared to how things were before the black boxes. Other trucking companies followed, and eventually I think they found a reasonable set of rules for the drivers that are not absolute compliance with the law, but certainly much safer than the 1970s and 80s when semi-trucks, particularly on back roads, would regularly be encountered doing 30-40mph OVER the limit and using their mass and velocity to bully other traffic out of their way.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Friday March 29 2019, @06:39AM (1 child)
What is with this obsession with getting people to the emergency room?
Anywhere sufficiently developed to have hospitals capable of treating emergencies also has a large number of people living there. The limiting factor on "time to emergency room" is not the speed of the car, it's the other traffic on the road. Doesn't matter if the car can do five times the speed limit - once you hit traffic (and you will) - you will only be traveling as fast as the person in front of you.
Further: isn't it excessively arrogant to expect that my emergency outweighs everyone else's safety? Sure, I don't want to exsanguinate in the back seat of a car on my way to hospital - but I also don't want to be responsible for other fatalities caused in getting me there.
I don't have a problem with ambulances going as fast as they can but they have two things a civilian "racing" to hospital doesn't have: a) sirens (which let people know to get out of the way, and explain why a vehicle is flying past) and; b) a dispassionate driver (who understands that whilst time may be the essence, safety is paramount).
Look - I am aware there are exceptions - the 2am no-traffic-on-the-road and the bringing someone in from a remote area to name a couple. But these are not the norm. Heck - racing someone to hospital is not the norm either and buying a Ferrari instead of a Corolla to get to hospital faster has about the same level of rationality as stockpiling military-grade weapons in preparation for a zombie apocalypse.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday March 29 2019, @05:23PM
It's generally the one case where normal people have a legitimate need for life-endangering urgency.
And yes - if you're speeding through traffic, you're a F'ing idiot asshole who is probably increasing the risk of somebody dying.
But if traffic is light, and you can go screaming down an unoccupied lane with a clear view of everyone who might get in your way? Not so much.
I certainly don't advocate driving like you have lights, siren, and adequate training. And you should probably get someone not emotionally compromised to drive, if at all possible, but an extra 10-40mph whenever road conditions allow? That can be the difference between life and death, with a minimal increase in total risk.