The Feds' Vehicle 'Kill Switch' Mandate Is a Gross (and Dangerous) Violation of Privacy | Jon Miltimore
fee.org
Over the last century, the Land of the Free has slowly transformed into a land governed by endless laws, largely by cracking down on vices instead of actual crimes, creating a society that would render us all criminals if our behavior were constantly observed. Meanwhile, the state has steadily expanded its use of mass surveillance, largely under the pretext of fighting “terror.” This is a toxic mixture.

Vehicle ‘Kill Switch’ Mandate Is a Gross (and Dangerous) Violation of Privacy::Over the last century, the Land of the Free has slowly transformed into a land governed by endless laws, largely by cracking down on vices instead of actual crimes, creating a society that would render us all criminals if our behavior were constantly observed. Meanwhile, the state has steadily expanded its use of mass surveillance, largely under the pretext of fighting “terror.” This is a toxic mixture.

  • Dem Bosain@midwest.socialEnglish
    5·
    1 year ago

    There’s no regulation requiring Remote Ignition Block, and no regulation forbidding it either. Expect NHTSA to wait until there’s a problem before it takes action one way or the other.

    This is also not a “passive” system, and therefore not relevant to the hysteria surrounding this issue.

    • trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      They only require the system to passively monitor the driver, e.g. doesn’t require the driver to blow in a breathalyzer.

      • Dem Bosain@midwest.socialEnglish
        3·
        1 year ago

        Sorry, yes, the new mandated system is “passive”. It’s all contained within the car, works automatically, doesn’t require any outside commands, doesn’t require any specific actions by the driver.

        The Onstar system requires a request from police. They request the shutdown/slowdown, presumably when the car is in a safe location.