Thread

1. gwbas1c · 1790888540 · focus · HN ↗

   This seems like something that needs legislation to address.

   1. goodmythical · 1790889633 · focus · HN ↗

      I'm sure that will go about as well as protecting the privacy of individuals in the face of "but the CHILDREN!" age verification.

      In-vehicle monitoring allows car manufacturers to remind the user to buckle up, keep their eyes on the road, stay off their phones, remind them to take breaks, turn the radio down in tense traffic, remind the driver to take a breath based on increased heart rate to minimize road rage, etc.

      Heck, we could really reduce lack of seatbelt related injuries and deaths if we could eliminate the 'drive' function while seatbelts are not properly worn (which we can now check with our AI cameras )

      What are you some kind of anti-safe-driving nut?

      1. lotsofpulp · 1790894626 · focus · HN ↗

         >What are you some kind of anti-safe-driving nut?

         What are you some kind of anti-kids-being-able-to-roam nut?

         Huge and tall vehicles and distracted and drunk drivers have made prisoners of anyone not in a car in much of the USA. Loss of freedom for people in cars is an acceptable price to regain freedom for people outside of cars.

         Maybe drivers will stop distracted driving and be responsible with their freedom when the camera shows them looking at their phone while they mow down a pedestrian or bicyclist and they are charged with manslaughter.

         1. broadside1296 · 1790949790 · focus · HN ↗

            I think it's supposed to be sarcasm, judging by the first line.

            1. goodmythical · 1791079241 · focus · HN ↗

               Thank you for your reading comprehension.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.