Here we go…

Again!!!

Buried deep within the massive infrastructure legislation recently signed by President Joe Biden is a little-noticed “safety” measure that will take effect in five years. Marketed to Congress as a benign tool to help prevent drunk driving, the measure will mandate that automobile manufacturers build into every car what amounts to a “vehicle kill switch.”

Full article, HERE from Daily Caller.

There are SO many issues with this one it’s not even close to being funny… 5th/6th Amendment violations to start with, 3rd party access???

WHICH 3rd party? .gov or Joe Smuckatelli your local hacker, or some rapist/robber/killer out to get somebody???

Just made the value of my old car go up!!! 🙂

I know what I’ve got, no lowball offers… Just sayin…


Comments

Here we go… — 19 Comments

  1. Aye. looks like vehicle maintenance just got Even More Important. And buying “new” before ‘implementation’ might be a Good Idea… or we need some ‘covert’ re-chipping in the interest of Liberty.

    How long before the crazy tune, “One Piece At A Time” makes some serious sense?

  2. Okay: TECHNOLOGY! Therefore, O Mighty OldNFO, my question isn’t REALLY radically off topic, if you squint a little.
    I received a link (https://www.history.com/news/first-man-moon-cost-lives-kennedy-armstrong) from the History Channel with the title: “How Landing the First Man on the Moon Cost Dozens of Lives.” The article includes a slideshow of eight astronauts /trainees /test pilots killed in five incidents over 19 years, mentions four more, and references “a stretch of 1952 (in which) seven test pilots died each month at Edwards.”
    Three years after he married my mom, my commercial pilot step-dad brought home the newly published book “Fate Is The Hunter,” by Ernest K. Gann. It became a part of our family ‘script’. He explained it to me this way: The Numbers Rule; every time you go up, there is some small risk. Keep going up, and The Numbers accumulate.
    So, my question is this: do you think landing on the moon cost an unusual number of lives?

    • The Numbers Rule; every time you go up, there is some small risk. Keep going up, and The Numbers accumulate.

      It’s called the gambler’s fallacy. Statisticians use it to justify whatever new tax levy or regulatory law they are being paid to support.

      The gambler’s fallacy is the erroneous belief that a single event is more or less likely to happen based on the outcome of a previous event, or series of events. The classic example is the coin toss.

      Say you have a coin, and you toss it 49 times. Each time you toss the coin it comes up heads. What are the odds of the coin coming up heads on the next (50th) try? The real answer is 50%, or even odds. The gambler’s fallacy will state otherwise.

      This assumes you are not using a coin given to you by our noble host, Old NFO.

      I, by the way, agree with Old NFO about the lives lost. I think it might have been Gus Grissom who, when questioned about the lives lost in the space program, replied, “So far we’ve been lucky.”

      Another item that never makes the news are the number and type of aircraft that test pilots refuse to fly. If I remember correctly, one looked like a Buck Rogers style aircraft that was supposed to take off vertically on four jet engines. Engineers built the thing, and no one would try flying it.

      • I just re-watched “Rosencranz and Guildenstern Are Dead” which leads with scene of the coins coming up HEADS every time, tee-hee!
        And right, the Numbers don’t actually accumulate, so that on your Nth flights, you are doomed.
        Where they DO matter is for a series of events. Using the coin toss example (assuming a fair coin), the odds of HEADS on EACH toss is 50%. But for a series of N tosses, the odds of every one coming up heads is (crap, can’t remember the formula!) 50%^N (I think). So, two heads in a row = 50% x 50% = 25%.
        However, I’m inclined to believe the the main function of The Numbers was to impress my mom (and other pretty girls in 1958/61) with his resolute courage.
        (He WAS a pilot, after all.)

  3. Orvan- Yep, ‘tuners’ are going to make a fortune!!!

    JMI- Yes, they do! Control IS their goal!

    Pat- In all honesty, I personally think they got off lucky with that few deaths. Test piloting was NOT for the faint of heart, especially when pushing the bleeding edges of the envelope as they knew it back then. There are still losses and MANY close calls, they just don’t make the news these days…

    • That’s what I thought, too. And some of the fatalities mentioned in the article had nothing to do with going to the moon, like the five men killed in a YB-49 Flying Wing.
      But, their clickbait worked, so there’s that.

  4. I’m thinking that last year’s purchase of a new car was a good thing. At our age we probably won’t ever need another, sixteen months of driving only 8K miles on it. Grandkids will probably get to enjoy it.

  5. you don’t think they’re going to allow you/us to keep those old gas cars on the road, do you? i look for them to ban my 20 y/o truck any minute. even if they don’t, where we gonna buy gas? they have us by the short hairs.

  6. Check out OnStar and GM cars in general, then investigate what hackers have discovered about cartapping. Tracking your car and listening to you while you drive has been going on for twenty years.

    The real significance in this new piece of legislation (good catch, Old NFO) is three-fold:

    1) This is signed into law by a president who can’t read a teleprompter reliably, and written by a group of men, women, and others who have no credentials beyond winning a popularity contest. Case in point: Do you really think The Four are smart enough to write law?

    2) The algorithm. This is a predictable offshoot of the self-driving vehicle project. The number one priority of a self-driving car is to do no harm, or in plain speak, don’t smack into anything. If the vehicle is being driven erratically, the operator is likely inebriated or impaired, and will smack into something. So, the vehicle stops and can’t be restarted. All this is decided without any human intervention.

    3) The next leap to conclusions strongly suggests that the activities of the driver be recorded and analyzed. In this case, where was the previous destination? If it was close to a bar, check the credit card usage of the driver, and if drinks were bought, notify the police. Or whatever.

    My own prediction for the future is bleak. Self-driving cars will become a reality, meaning us old geezers don’t have to surrender our driver’s licenses – we won’t need one. Then certain destinations will simply vanish from the map. Gated communities, for instance, can’t be listed as a destination unless you live there. Gun stores may vanish.

    Some years back, a financially embarrassed lady I know leased a new car. She fell behind on payments, and ultimately made an arrangement with the bank – half now, half later. She’s on her way to the bank when the car’s engine stopped, leaving her in the middle of traffic with the OnStar message advising her that her payment was past due, and until she paid up the vehicle couldn’t be driven. Nice, huh?

  7. ATM, I am too grumpy to come up with sensible remedies. I am sure that they are possible.

    Key thing here is a human factor.

    Public has expectations, wants them met, and American population is not one of the ones where the oral history tends to promote a cringing fear of crossing a man with more expensive clothing.

    There has been a bunch of complicated faffing around.

    This has cost trust.

    Opposition seems to expect American public to cringe, instead of quietly and persistently seeking to have their expectations met.

    This is another round of cheating us out of what we expect, and with a haste and wisdom that is likely to see the manufacturers implement worse than the politicians expect.

    Manufacturers are already doing stupid things with wireless updates of the operating software, and with cellphone integration.

    If Red States were not mostly squishes and idiots, it might be reasonable to pass state laws banning the new insane ‘safety improvements’.

    Lot of organizations now think that going along and getting along will not bear very bitter fruit.

    They may be surprised when what they have already done to screw over the public, and cheat public expectations, kills the fundamental business of the organization.

  8. Hey Old NFO;

    This promises to make things entertaining…especially for those that have the *wronggrouphivethink*, I can see .gov using that feature to harass those people that .gov view as “subversives” like those of us that don’t care for the people on the left side of the aisle.

  9. Exactly why the Smarter Half and I gladly paid $20,000 for a 10 year old pick-up. OK, it ONLY had 7,600 miles on it and looked brand new.

  10. My oldest son is a GM Master Mechanic and if there is something that need to be removed from the vehicle he will do it. I do not plan to buy something new anytime since mine is in great shape.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.