Feds Surveillance Tech Mandatory 2027 [ADMIN WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[Vtur]

All this does is increases vehicles cost. There will always be a way to defeats electrical and mechanical systems.

Sponsored

 

[ecidiego]

0 chance this is on any MY2027 vehicle.

 

[Verne]

This will never happen (or in this current form). Trust me.

Completely tramples the 4th amendment. The government cannot live in your automobile with you; period, especially if this is being leveraged to uphold some type of litigious event. This will need to be a volunteer system that you choose to enable/disable. But, then, again that tramples the 4th because what do they do with that data? If you disable, does that trigger another event? Remember traffic cameras for speed and red lights? Yeah, those are even illegal in most states now.

I need to get to the hospital because of an emergency and my car won't let me drive because it thinks I'm impaired but really my eyes just remain slightly dilated from my visit to the eye doctor from earlier.

This will be shot down immediately by any court in any case that wants to litigate.

 

[Dilly’S Willy]

Bet you a dollar your car won't start or shift into gear if the system is obscured or disabled - just like how running out of DEF prevents a diesel from starting despite it being perfectly capable of running without DEF.

Facts! They'll integrate it into the canbus system to ensure you can't (easily, cheaply) bypass it, AND they'll make it a "readiness monitor" to pass safety inspections, like seatbelts or the parking brake (which many shops sadly won't fail people for when they should).

Goverment has become to powerful and we need to really rid ourselves from them. Safety and peace from goverment will come at the cost of Freedom smh.

Release those redacted government officials in the Epstein files so this can happen. (NO, idc what party you belong to, this is about the truth and enforcing our constitution!) BuT oUr GoVeRnMeNt WiLl cOlLaPsE!!! GOOD, we need a fresh start back to our origins!

This will never happen (or in this current form). Trust me.

Completely tramples the 4th amendment. The government cannot live in your automobile with you; period, especially if this is being leveraged to uphold some type of litigious event. This will need to be a volunteer system that you choose to enable/disable. But, then, again that tramples the 4th because what do they do with that data? If you disable, does that trigger another event? Remember traffic cameras for speed and red lights? Yeah, those are even illegal in most states now.

I need to get to the hospital because of an emergency and my car won't let me drive because it thinks I'm impaired but really my eyes just remain slightly dilated from my visit to the eye doctor from earlier.

This will be shot down immediately by any court in any case that wants to litigate.

They already tried shooting it down, but congress is still in favor because they don't have to worry about driving these vehicles.

This is a 4th amendment violation, but do you know the easiest work around? Remember that contract you sign when you buy a new vehicle? Yeah, the one with all those LONG terms & conditions? Remember that "Accept" icon on your radio screen when you first turn of your vehicle? Maybe if people actually READ what they were about to sign/accept, we'd have less issues like this. Because those "fine print" terms we don't want are in there.

Jeep actually already got away with sharing your data/giving you ads on your radio screen, with that "Accept" icon when the vehicle is first started. Look up how they get away with the ads on the new 12" radios with the accept button. It was also in the T&C from the initial sale. They LOVE hiding these T&Cs on their site or making you request the info at YOUR convenience.

Your vehicle shares everything you do, the moment you use "connected services" with the radio, OR when you pair/connect your phone to the vehicle. In the latter, now you're sharing everything you do with your phone too. Go read CarPlay T&C, AA T&C, and the manufacturer T&C for radio use.


Just to be clear, I am NOT in favor of any of this. Quite the opposite. One reason I try to use Open Source devices and make my things OS too.

And you can bet your bootyhole this will be another reason they claim Right to Repair should be illegal too...for "security".

 

[Verne]

I don't care what congress wants. They are not the judicial branch. They could make up a law tomorrow that you have to wear a hat to go to work. Time and time again when there is overreach, the judicial branch rebukes the lawmakers. The legal jargon in the lease paperwork outlines what happens in a loan default. That has nothing to do with this example (but yes, people should read). However most of the fine print on data collection is for a data lake, not specificity to you as a citizen. The accept button on the radio (which I don't think I have ever had to push because it goes away on its own???) is so you cannot sue the manufacturer if you wreck the car when you are playing with the radio. We live in a litigious society so unfortunately, those things exist. Data mining happens. Hell, the four cameras on police cars are constantly scanning license plates. How do you think they find out that a suspect is two towns over in a matter of hours? I get all that.

However, a system installed in a car that will make decisions on your civil liberties without your consent is in direct violation of the 4th. Trust me. They may create a law to add this feature...and it may go into your car. The info will be inadmissible in court and the system will have a required override. You can opt in to use this a safety feature but the, "force," part will not be upheld.

I'm not here to argue about any of this. I'm here to offer my expertise in the matter as I have been a part of these processes for years (esq).

 

[Gvsukids]

Accept

There is no need to click the button, it'll just disappear after a few seconds.

 

[vacaedzzr1200]

Just more of the nanny state telling you they know better than you. One more cut out of our personal liberties.
What will the system think as your head bounces around off road?

 

[GI Grandpa]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/federal-surveillance-tech-becomes-mandatory-161321992.html

Found in the JL Forum....Here are a couple blurbs quoted from same:

- Your next car purchase comes with an unwelcome passenger: a federal mandate requiring surveillance technology that monitors your every blink, glance, and head nod.

- Infrared cameras and sensors create a constant biometric assessment of driver alertness and sobriety.

- The tech involves infrared cameras mounted on steering columns or A-pillars, tracking eye movement, pupil dilation, and drowsiness patterns. Unlike the breathalyzer ignition interlocks from DUI convictions, these systems operate passively

- If the AI determines you’re impaired (blood alcohol ≥0.08% or showing fatigue), it can prevent ignition startup or limit vehicle speed.

- The surveillance rollout targets late 2026 to 2027 for all new passenger vehicles.

- While NHTSA’s final rule faced delays beyond the November 2024 deadline, automakers will still get 2-3 years for full implementation once regulations are finalized. Your current vehicle stays surveillance-free, but shopping for a 2027 model means accepting this digital copilot.

- The privacy implications extend beyond federal oversight. While the law doesn’t mandate external data sharing, manufacturers could potentially upload biometric data to corporate servers, raising concerns about sharing with insurance companies to adjust your premiums based on driving behavior.

- The federal government promises this surveillance saves 9,000-10,000 lives annually. Whether that justifies your car becoming a mobile panopticon depends on how much vehicle autonomy you’re willing to trade for theoretical safety gains.

The actual article says this is a requirement in 2029, not this year or next. Since this is Biden era policy, it may get undone by the current administration

 

[Sweetums]

This will never happen (or in this current form). Trust me.

Completely tramples the 4th amendment. The government cannot live in your automobile with you; period, especially if this is being leveraged to uphold some type of litigious event. This will need to be a volunteer system that you choose to enable/disable. But, then, again that tramples the 4th because what do they do with that data? If you disable, does that trigger another event? Remember traffic cameras for speed and red lights? Yeah, those are even illegal in most states now.

I need to get to the hospital because of an emergency and my car won't let me drive because it thinks I'm impaired but really my eyes just remain slightly dilated from my visit to the eye doctor from earlier.

This will be shot down immediately by any court in any case that wants to litigate.

The way the law is written, it probably doesn't violate the 4th because it only requires the onboard system to do the processing without explicitly requiring data be sent to the government (not that it matters, NSA has been illegally wiretapping communications for over 20 years and no one seems to give a damn). The loophole for this is that the Bill of Rights limits the government's actions, such as speech. The government can't collect this data without a warrant, but you can click "Accept Terms and Conditions" set by a private entity, like a car company, to collect the information. The government then buys that information without needing a warrant. This is how law enforcement has been getting around those pesky "rights" for some time.

In this case, the car companies will be highly incentivized to collect the information because they know there's a market for it with both other companies, but also government agencies.

 

[Panthers65]

Bet you a dollar your car won't start or shift into gear if the system is obscured or disabled - just like how running out of DEF prevents a diesel from starting despite it being perfectly capable of running without DEF.

That's my concern, just like O2 Sensors in your exhaust in emissions states. Don't actually do anything, just disable your ability to renew your tags if the sensor "Thinks" something is wrong. 9 times out of 10 the sensor itself is what goes bad and not the system it's monitoring, but all the sudden the Sensor prevents me from renewing my tag and I get to pay a $400 tax in order to drive the truck I paid for on the roads I pay for.

If it pleases the Crown, my I utilize the roads my tax dollars pay for with the vehicle I pay for that burns the gas I pay for on the tires I pay for?

 

[Waltzforzizi]

More reasons to get a 60 muscle car for retirement or maybe an resto mod Toyota FJ40 land cruiser once the gladiator get put out to pasture.

 

[Verne]

The way the law is written, it probably doesn't violate the 4th because it only requires the onboard system to do the processing without explicitly requiring data be sent to the government (not that it matters, NSA has been illegally wiretapping communications for over 20 years and no one seems to give a damn). The loophole for this is that the Bill of Rights limits the government's actions, such as speech. The government can't collect this data without a warrant, but you can click "Accept Terms and Conditions" set by a private entity, like a car company, to collect the information. The government then buys that information without needing a warrant. This is how law enforcement has been getting around those pesky "rights" for some time.

In this case, the car companies will be highly incentivized to collect the information because they know there's a market for it with both other companies, but also government agencies.

So my argument isn't with the collection of data. Unavoidable. As long as the data is used broadly. However, if the car starts making decisions to start on your behalf because the government approved a policy set forth through the manufacturer, that is where the slope gets greased. What happens if the system reports you as possibly drunk every Friday at 6PM. Is there an alert to somewhere? Is there an action taken? Is there a GPS link to where you are when this happens? Do the authorities start watching you at that time and place every Friday? God knows you should not drink and drive but it is the job of trained law enforcement to find you base on your actions, not because a car tattled on you. I cannot confirm that the car reports, but if any of us knows how the government tries to work, you can bet they will enter the gray area.

Now, if you have issues with falling asleep behind the wheel, or you have a medical condition such as narcolepsy, then this system might alert you if you are drifting. Hell my Lexus will tell me to pull over and get coffee if I have been driving too long or the lane drift system fires too many times. Tesla requires eyes on roads. My wife's Volvo will drive for you as long as you have your hands on the wheel. All great things that make us safe in a car. That's beyond a vehicle telling me what I can and cannot do based on government approved software.

 

[Verne]

So my argument isn't with the collection of data. Unavoidable. As long as the data is used broadly. However, if the car starts making decisions to start on your behalf because the government approved a policy set forth through the manufacturer, that is where the slope gets greased. What happens if the system reports you as possibly drunk every Friday at 6PM. Is there an alert to somewhere? Is there an action taken? Is there a GPS link to where you are when this happens? Do the authorities start watching you at that time and place every Friday? God knows you should not drink and drive but it is the job of trained law enforcement to find you base on your actions, not because a car tattled on you. Habitual offenders lose rights and are required to blow into a tube to start a car. That's a punishment bc of a crime. What crime did I commit if I have a new baby and I look tired? I cannot confirm that the car reports, but if any of us knows how the government tries to work, you can bet they will enter the gray area.

Now, if you have issues with falling asleep behind the wheel, or you have a medical condition such as narcolepsy, then this system might alert you if you are drifting. Hell my Lexus will tell me to pull over and get coffee if I have been driving too long or the lane drift system fires too many times. Tesla requires eyes on roads. My wife's Volvo will drive for you as long as you have your hands on the wheel. All great things that make us safe in a car. That's beyond a vehicle telling me what I can and cannot do based on government approved software.

 

[Mad Mac]

Scotch Magic Tape might work better.
It is translucent and lets light through
but is not transparent.

I've downed more than my share
of "tufors", two 16 ounce beers for $1.29,
for the commute home,
but do you really want to share the road
with impaired drivers?

Big Brother could assert
that driving on Federally funded roads
is a privilege and not a right.
And there is that "social contract" thing.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his 1762 book argues for 'a political community based on a "social contract" where individuals surrender some natural freedoms for the collective good, creating a government that enforces the "general will" of the people.'

Don't get me wrong. I am a classical libertarian.
But I did just install a stop start eliminator.
So there's that.

 

[Sweetums]

So my argument isn't with the collection of data. Unavoidable. As long as the data is used broadly. However, if the car starts making decisions to start on your behalf because the government approved a policy set forth through the manufacturer, that is where the slope gets greased. What happens if the system reports you as possibly drunk every Friday at 6PM. Is there an alert to somewhere? Is there an action taken? Is there a GPS link to where you are when this happens? Do the authorities start watching you at that time and place every Friday? God knows you should not drink and drive but it is the job of trained law enforcement to find you base on your actions, not because a car tattled on you. I cannot confirm that the car reports, but if any of us knows how the government tries to work, you can bet they will enter the gray area.

Now, if you have issues with falling asleep behind the wheel, or you have a medical condition such as narcolepsy, then this system might alert you if you are drifting. Hell my Lexus will tell me to pull over and get coffee if I have been driving too long or the lane drift system fires too many times. Tesla requires eyes on roads. My wife's Volvo will drive for you as long as you have your hands on the wheel. All great things that make us safe in a car. That's beyond a vehicle telling me what I can and cannot do based on government approved software.

The way the law is written is that all that assessment is required - but it does not require internet connectivity. The intention seems to be that the car does that assessment itself, as far as I can tell there's nothing that's being reported directly to any government agency, the same way the car knows if you have your seatbelt on, but isn't reporting that over the wireless modem. Of course that data is being stored locally in the datalogger and could be pulled if you get into a crash, but that would usually require a warrant unless the car company has the data and willingly turns it over (in exchange for a moderate "processing fee").

Sponsored