• Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I absolutely oppose universal kill switches and I’m not insane. Something about that pesky “innocent 'till proven guilty” thing. If you lose that privilege, you get a breathalyzer lock. That’s fair. But I haven’t used “smart” tech in a car that hasn’t bugged out in unpredictable ways and this won’t be an exception. Technology that overrides driver input is a risk to those the vehicle belongs and that’s unacceptable to me.

    • ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      “Innocent until proven guilty” has nothing to do with it. When a cop stops you he’s not indicting you. Switching your gas off remotely replaces chasing calling in reinforcements and chasing you over several blocks when you start speeding up, or flipping your car over. Both of those already impair or override the driver’s input quite a bit.

      Having the opinion that your driver input should override the cop’s order to stop, and that society should trust you to stop instead of putting a kill switch in your engine is an insane opinion, and prime driver entitlement.

      And I would love the same for drivers without insurance, license removals and cars that didn’t pass the tech inspection