My experience with my Volvo EX30 has been the complete opposite. Although the false positives have gone down with software updates, it's still wrong so often I turn it off every time it bothers me. Due to some other regulation, this setting is unfortunately not remembered. That means every time I get in the car, I have to spend time going trough the settings to disable it, often while already driving. Seems like a gr…
Is that the regulation that is bad or the way the manufacturer implemented it ? I think your comment and the one you were answering to explain it very well. Don't buy car that sucks.
All new cars. At this point I don't know if I'd buy anything made after 2008. Whenever I rent a new car around here (in the EU) I find them very annoying. The worst is the cruise control that tries to stick to the speed limit -- but its sensors don't always read the signs very well, so you'll often slow to 50 km/h (about 30 mph) for no reason. Then there's the incessant beeping at you, "lane assist" that you can't tu…
It BS article, no cameras pointed at your face are required. They require "Advanced Driver Distraction Warning System", don't specify how it should be implemented. Here's the text describing the system: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2590/oj/eng It specifically mentions that it is illegal to use the cameras from such system to identify the person. It is pretty much the opposite of what people think its go…
Is it BS if this is the only way to implement such a system? Then it is practically required. Legal or not these cameras will be used to identify you, car companies do all kinds of shady stuff with the data they collect with all their fancy new sensors. Besides, cars have famously lagged in security standards, so this data will be exfiltrated. By comparison, your comment is more hysterical sounding than the article. It is very reasonable to not want even more invasive systems installed in cars, especially when this may bleed into US models and then used against us here where the company can absolutely legally sell your data.
Over Christmas, I spent several minutes trying to debug my beeping dashboard - it only seemed to happen sometimes while driving, so stopping didn’t let me figure it out. Eventually I discovered that it was beeping at me because my eyes weren’t on the road enough. Of course, figuring that out required me to take my eyes off the road to figure out which blinking signal was associated with this particular alarm. Also, b…
So to play devil's advocate... were you taking your eyes off the road for too long? There are many many poor drivers and many many distracted drivers out there. I'm not accusing you of one, but maybe a little bit of self-introspection may be necessary.
My in-laws Kia did this for me. It got really shitty when it got darker and presumably had to use an IR camera. And I am tall so the angle might have been bad. It flagged me every minute. Even when I intentionally focused right ahead.
Tracking gaze is not immune to assorted failure modes.
So to play devil's advocate... were you taking your eyes off the road for too long? There are many many poor drivers and many many distracted drivers out there. I'm not accusing you of one, but maybe a little bit of self-introspection may be necessary.
I had a similar situation with a rental car, driving on winding roads. The beeping happened periodically as I was driving around hairpin bends, and the eye detection was triggered by me turning my head to look towards the oncoming sharp corner. Not the best situation to have a "safety" alert start chastising you!
I wonder if it’s malicious compliance on the part of the manufacturers.
They can trivially determine if their tech is effective. Making it mandatory, despite the problems they must surely know about, might produce some democratic pressure for more nuanced legislation.
All new cars. At this point I don't know if I'd buy anything made after 2008. Whenever I rent a new car around here (in the EU) I find them very annoying. The worst is the cruise control that tries to stick to the speed limit -- but its sensors don't always read the signs very well, so you'll often slow to 50 km/h (about 30 mph) for no reason. Then there's the incessant beeping at you, "lane assist" that you can't tu…
EU driving assists are obtrusive to the point of making driving less safe in my experience. Great video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-S76WEl25k
My toyota has one that when you're in a narrow road with parked cars that you must drive around, it constantly thinks it's going to do a frontal collision. Except it detects it like half a second too late, when I've already avoided the parked car (this happens at rather slow speeds).
Nope, that's not what we call slippery slope. This system does not require data recording or sharing, does not require cameras.
It absolutely is a slippery slope argument. "New government mandate paves way for additional government mandate" is about as straightforward a slippery slope argument as you can get. Slippery slope arguments don't require the eventual fear (e.g. cameras recording you) to be present in the current form, otherwise it wouldn't be a slope .
There are no camera requirements and if cameras are used they are prohibited from using them for the stuff the article implies because the privacy is protected by GDPR. Remember how US corporations really hate EU regulations? Yes that's the regulation preventing them from processing your face even if the system is implemented with a camera.
The “green movement” and “the environment” but mostly a desire for control. Why should people be able to own private property like cars, we should all be using government owned means of transportation in our new socialist utopia.
Who desires the control? Can you name a member of this nebulous conspiracy? Nobody I've spoken to about this topic has been able to.
>Who desires the control? Can you name a member of this nebulous conspiracy?
Every level of government, the World Economic Forum and every other organization that seeks to mandate digital currencies, mandate digital IDs, impose "chat control" and eliminate all privacy. You have to have your head buried deep, deep in the sand to think this is some sort of conspiracy. It is all happening right out in the open.
Ford has had that since Blue Cruise 2.0, or thereabouts. It really shocked me how often it catches my attention being diverted. Things like talking to my passengers, adjusting the climate controls, or eating- I'm not even talking about 'advanced distractions' like my phone. It also seemed really accurate. I never remember it beeping at me when I was actually paying attention. It's totally plausible to me that this ki…
I don't doubt your experience but I've had the exact opposite experience with a Subaru where there were so many false positives it was worse than useless and was instead an active distraction. Given the general state of auto manufacturer software I would fully expect something like this to be janky and unreliable. It might work in some conditions on some faces but also perform abysmally in many other scenarios.