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

[antihero23]

I bet most of you, a certain demographic, choose stuff like this and don't even realize it because you're in a cult..

Sponsored

 

[Sweetums]

I bet most of you, a certain demographic, choose stuff like this and don't even realize it because you're in a cult..

Care to elaborate?

 

[Badunit]

This technology is fraught with potential problems.

• Will it be able to see through dark sunglasses on a bright summer's day? Or do I have to drive while blinded by the sunlight?
• Can you override it if it won't let you move your car but you need to take your child to the hospital?
• Will it work correctly if you have any disabilities or disfigurements that make you look tired or drunk? Saggy eyelids, for example.
• Will it work differently or be incorrect more often for some races and their facial structures?
• How exactly is it determining % alcohol from looking at your face? Alcoholics can have a pretty high alcohol content without appearing so.
• What about all those commuters first thing in the morning trying to get to work who can't start their cars because they look tired?
• Will ESS start your car back up at the stoplight when it turns green if this new system says you look tired or drunk?
• How will it work when off road? Do you always need to be looking forward, can't look at that tree that is inches away from taking out a fender?

 

[Jrgunn5150]

Am old enough to remember that seatbelt laws would only ever be a secondary stop lol.

For all you, they would never...

They will work it out.

 

[Wageslave]

I can't wait to write this out with HPTuners when the day comes.

 

[davey]

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.

I WONT HAVE ONE... I LIKE OLDER STUFF ANYWAY MY 97 PURRS

 

[Jrgunn5150]

I can't wait to write this out with HPTuners when the day comes.

HP Tuners will hand you over as quickly as they did diesel delete folks.

Who in turn wasted no time in handing over their customer lists, all while running Gofundme's for legal defense

 

[DiehardTory]

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").

The car company does not have access to the PCM Datalogs unless the mfg gets to that unit OBD port to connect (perhaps ON Star could) to extract the data and you noted a Warrant is / should be required.

 

[Bayrat]

My old diesel pickup has not nanny state stuff or emissions . That is the reason I purchased it just prior to all of the emissions and tech being added. Perhaps now is the time to purchase new vehicles also.

 

[MPMB]

It'll be funny until it happens to you. Then it'll be hilarious.

The "nanny state" of monitoring drivers is absolutely laughable. Apples to pears comparison- Years ago we did that insurance OBD-plugin for 3 months that analyzed driving habits. I drove very timidly and like I figured it wanted me to. My wife drove slightly more cognizant of it being plugged in her car, too. Not like we were a-hole drivers to begin with, either.

Turns out our "driving habits" increased our risk because we accelerated 30% of the time more than other drivers, used excessive braking, and something-something else.

It was completely context-less. We commuted to work on the freeway, so we had to accelerate on an on-ramp. Then we had stop-and-go traffic most of the way. Once off the freeway, there was 3-4 miles of stoplight-littered streets to navigate. Then reverse it to get home. It seemed the only thing it really tracked was the amount of acceleration and braking used as a percent of driving time.

<facepalm>

So even though we had no wrecks, no tickets, commutes under 15mi, multiple cars, cars with almost all the safety features (at the time) - no discounts. And it sounded like we were lucky not to get a raise in rates.

So I don't really trust any "monitoring" device inside a vehicle that's going to evaluate my ability to operate a vehicle. Maybe a breathalyzer, but that's why I have a pack of mint gum in my cars.

 

[DirkG]

So I don't really trust any "monitoring" device inside a vehicle that's going to evaluate my ability to operate a vehicle. Maybe a breathalyzer, but that's why I have a pack of mint gum in my cars.

Exactly. If technology is going to be mandated to improve driving safety, it should instead be front and rear dashcams to help monitor and document the thousands of dangerous morons around me.

 

[Rusty PW]

My work truck has Geotab Drive tracker in it. I have to have the app on my phone to so that I can drive the truck. It track location, speed, stopping force, G force in all directions. All of this information goes to the director of vehicle maintenance. If I go 6 mph over the speed limit for 15 seconds. He gets a bing, and I get a bing on the app telling me to slow down. If I get hit, or I hit something. It will show up on the G force indicator. I've set it off a few times trying to go up a dirt road to a compressor station. LOL. All of this shows up on my yearly review. If I get too many bings. It will hurt my pay raise.

 

[NC_Overland]

This is unfortunate news and I’m very much opposed to it, but I can’t imagine that defeating it would be illegal or they’d have to try to pass legislation to make it have to be installed on all vehicles.

 

[NC_Overland]

I bet most of you, a certain demographic, choose stuff like this and don't even realize it because you're in a cult..

What ever do you mean?

 

[LOL WUT]

What exactly is everyone doing in vehicles that makes you so concerned about this?

Sponsored