It clearly figures the line is straight and the car is swerving all over the place. The car was seeing asphalt repair patches on the road, which are by their nature wiggly lines. I kept getting warnings of 'erratic' driving from my VW and I couldn't figure out what was going on.
> I had to drive 'erratic' a moment ago not because I am drunk or fell asleep, but because a kid ran into a street and I had to do an evasive maneuver" one. No more car leases unless you can provide a "positive" driving score. Insurers may start to politely ask for the data if you want lower premiums, or a contract at all. Once you have a system that monitors your driving proficiency, BAC or both, a lot of companies will get curious about that. That aside, the privacy implications look pretty real to me. Which I am very doubtful about here, because they aren't trying to model something deterministic, but model something that will use some kind of "learning" to spit out some probabilities.
Kill switch bill software#
That is assuming the software is working "correctly" in the first place. There won't be a "It's an emergency" button (because a lot of drunks would just press it), nor a "I am lawfully driving on my own private property" or a "I am not actually impaired, I had to drive 'erratic' a moment ago not because I am drunk or fell asleep, but because a kid ran into a street and I had to do an evasive maneuver" one. But every rule has exceptions, and software is generally too rigid to account for every possible exceptional case. Or maybe you had a beer and then the emergency happens, and the car detects "passively and accurately" your BAC.īanning drunk, drugged and impaired driving is good. What, for example, if you're living in a rural area, then your wife goes into labor (or there is any kind of other emergency) and the car thinks your somewhat "erratic" driving style, due to the stress of the situation, warrants killing the engine? It only talks about detecting "impairment" which may mean a lot of things. There are many many issues with this proposal. It's Congress asking the executive branch to do some work, but not actually forcing them to do so. In software terms, this is a user story that was just submitted for development. It also gives the DOT an out to say that it can't be done, in which case in 2031, they need to write a report to Congress to say why it can't be done. That rule must give car manufactures at least another two years to implement the requirement. The law requires that the Secretary publish this rule within the next three years, unless they think it can't be done, in which case they can push it out another three years.
This will apply only after the DOT finalizes a rule describing what all those things actually mean in terms of manufacture. "passively and accurately" detect whether someone's BAC exceeds the Federal limit, and prevent or limit car operation if it's detected. and prevent or limit operation if an impairment is detected."Ģ.
Kill switch bill driver#
to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired. "passively monitor the performance of a driver. 3684 (as enrolled), defines an "advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology" as a system which can do /one/ of the following:ġ. This is a terrible description of what the law actually does.
0 kommentar(er)
