top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 53 points 3 months ago* (29 children)

AI will assess if they are looking at the road and, depending on speed, give a warning if they don't.

And I am totally sure it will not misread someone turning their head to secure a lane change going 220 km/h on the Autobahn and will not spook them with a sudden, unexpected alarm sound making the driver jerk the steering wheel causing a horrible crash.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    You talk like the whole Problem doesn't already start with a AI Camera filming you the entire time in your face. Modern Cars already sell a lot of data about you. Much more then you expect a car to know about you. Yea give them my facedata and a Videofeed of me... great idea...

    We don't even need to talk about how these signals can spook someone. Such cameras should not be in the car in the first place

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago

    The rental cars I've used in Europe in the last few years are absolutely relentless with their warnings; it just becomes noise that you ignore.

    It thinks you're not watching the road, it thinks the speed limit is 30kph when the signs say 80, it doesn't like that you've crossed into another lane to pass a cyclist, it's warm outside, it's cold outside, the person who just got into the car hasn't finished putting their seatbelt on, the bag on the back seat hasn't put its seatbelt on, your parking spot is within a meter of another car, the tires are 32 PSI instead of 33.

    Alarm fatigue sets in really fast.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    It's not like LLMs will be doing this - they just get lumped under the same vague "AI" label. I believe these types of systems are much more reliable. I'd also be surprised if the warning is anything as obnoxious as to cause the driver to jerk the steering wheel, because that would be a problem even if it is correct.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    I know there are reliable AI applications, for example cancer recognition models scanning CT imaging.

    However, from what I know systems trying pattern recognition in human behaviour are the opposite of these medical implementations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    I know there are reliable AI applications, for example cancer recognition models scanning CT imaging.

    Those are not reliable at all and only meant as hints for the radiologist to check certain areas twice. They do not identify cancer but spots that may be out of place. However, not all radiologists seem to know that and a relative of mine would have been pushed into end-of-life care if not for the intervention of another doctor in the family. He had to take it up to the head of department, though. The spots in question turned out to be old scarring and could have been easily identified if the radiologist had also consulted older scans as would have been her damned job. Instead she thought the AI was thinking for her.

    Similar software also exists for spotting tooth cavities. It's useful, but not to be trusted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Those signals are as subtle and obvious as all other signals a car can give. This system has already existed for many years and already exists in many cars. You can easily ignore it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (9 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 49 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    I read the other day that laws are being passed by people with chauffeurs for people who drive cars and I cant get that out of my mind.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    That exactly is the problem with most laws passed these days. The political caste is so disconnected from normal everyday life of normal people that they aren't even impacted directly by them anymore, so even if they wanted to, they can't make normal laws for normal people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    You can thank the European car industry for this. They've lobbied for this to become law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Probably, but it's certainly more complicated. Fiat complained about the added cost of such systems. On the low budget end, this adds a noticeable chunk to the price. Bad for sales in the EU, added complications for export. I could imagine the "premium brands" like such regulations that remove some competition.

    The yahoo post in OP is a press release by a Swedish tech company that makes such systems. They're not exactly part of the car industry, but they claim to have lobbied for this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    Notice how these "Liberals", even after watching America fall to fascism and their own domestic resurgence, are continuing to implement all the tools necessary for big brother style totalitarianism? How they're continuing to implement big brother FOR fascism?

    It's almost like they work for the same interests...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    My 2001 car is looking more beautiful than ever

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Cars built much later than 2010 are pretty much all piles of junk by design. Unrepairable, unmaintainable, technically owned by the manufacturers rather than their owners.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Not entirely true. The EU mandates a "driver drowsiness and attention warning". It doesn't mandate the use of cameras. The word "camera" is not mentioned.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Can't I just tape the fucking camera? Whats the point of this?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    No you can not. If you do, it will trigger an emergency stop after a minute.

    And no, I am not kidding. I have tried this on a new car just a few days ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Another reason not to get a car again!

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    The EU obsession with expanding their surveillance state is insane.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Riding a motorcycle has never felt so free

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    My experience with driver aids and safety systems is limited to 2023 models but the implementation of everything from skid control to lane centering depends so much on the manufacturer’s implementation. My observation from a limited number of cars is that stability control quality scales with vehicle price, but reviews indicate that the ADAS does not.

    I’ve driven two vehicles from the same company with the same features and different shape (ie bumper and windshield height) and one consistently β€œlost” view of a flatbed truck, which isn’t confidence inspiring.

    Like reversing cameras, the products range from potatovision 480i to 4k UHD.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Recently I accepted a new job, and it will come with a new company car.

    If I happen to get a model that was sold after this rule goes into effect, I'm planning to tape off the camera.
    Hopefully that should be enough to "fool" the systems in question

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Since July 7, all new vehicles must have an "advanced driver distraction warning" (ADDW) system. That means that there will be a (probably IR) camera constantly monitoring the driver. AI will assess if they are looking at the road and, depending on speed, give a warning if they don't.

    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=PI_COM%3AC%282023%294523

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    Weird. Is this a typo? They must've written "mandate" where they meant "prohibit" or something.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Duct tape has a new fan now.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Startling drivers while operating a vehicle on the road. What could possibly go wrong?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago
    load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί