- lights permanently on ("safety", definitely not for your ability to get lost in the dark)
- continuously stores logs of speed, brakes, seatbelts, signal, vehicle inclination, GSM connection etc ("safety", called "black box" in Europe, also warns the driver when local speed limit exceeded)
- permanent GSM connection ("safety", definitely not for tracking, pinky promise!)
- continuously monitoring the driver's head/face ("safety", called driver drowsiness warning)
- engine turns off when stationary (the default setting can't be changed by the user, but by a car service with the right tools)
- car brakes on its own ("safety", but it's so bad I turn it off every time I power it on, it brakes when someone nearby but not right in front of you slows down, cannot be disabled permanently)
None of the things you mentioned are particularly an issue with the regulations, they legitimately assist in situations where they are meant to assist. If some feature is mildly inconvenient to you but saves the life of another human being then I feel you can live with the inconvenience.
If you made an argument about subscriptions for heater seating or carplay or some nonsense then you have a valid argument and is in the same line as DRM, mandated actual safety feature not do much.
Let me enable the features that I consider I might need, such as permanent logging of speed, seatbelts, inclination, etc. Let me disable the features I don't want when I don't want them.
Cars sold to the police have the option to not have their lights permanently on, so it is definitely possible / software setting, it's just inaccessible to regular users.
When some dude runs you over and your family can't prove they were speeding without the data you enjoy these things very much. It would've saved me quite a bit of headache for example.
Having data on every single thing someone does would be handy for all future crimes. Why don't we push for that level of surveillance. Because we are trying to balance with privacy.
It absolutely helps. It tells everyone that the car is on!
Anecdote: coming from a country where this is mandatory, visiting a country where it's not, I almost got run over because I assumed a car was parked when I glanced left before crossing the road.
Of course, might not prove that one or the other is safer, but it did show me how often I subconsciously use headlights as an indicator of off (=> stationary => safe) vs. on (=> potentially moving => potentially a "threat")
Because it's not always about you. A lot of examples on why these features are useful are about others who exist around you, not for your own convenience. You live in a society.
Lots of cars don't. You've been ranting about several things that aren't universal, as has been explained several times by several people in this thread. Why the breakthrough now?
> Does it not strike anyone else as wrong that a printer that you own has to do the bidding of the government instead of you? [...] Isn't there anyone who believes that your own possessions shouldn't be made to conspire against you?
That's the entire point. Our own possessions are made to conspire against us, and my point was "safety" with quotes. And you seem to support possessions conspiring against their owners in the name of "safety", but that's your choice. Most HNers are against this.
Your point is clumsily made, the examples you chose are bad ones if you're trying to demonstrate overreach.
There's also plenty of the overreach of the kind you're trying to demonstrate that doesn't come from the government, again, as has been illustrated multiple times within the thread. In fact, most of your examples do not come down as orders from the government at all, but the corporations, allowing you to vote with your wallet. I believe the free market is also quite popular on HN.
How is the black box a safety feature? The word "safety" is used by everyone nowadays when they don't have actual arguments for things they impose on others.
Well you see, if I'm driving too fast and I cause a crash - I might lie and claim I wasn't driving too fast.
The black box, by providing evidence to prosecute me, makes the roads safer for other people as while I'm in prison, I can't cause any further accidents. But it doesn't make me all that much safer, prison is a dangerous place.
What a bunch of BS. Are you blind to how the world works?
The only time a black box ever gets used for that stuff is when an agent of the state or corporation with deep pockets to buy power or other "more equal animal" is trying to get one over of one of us peasants.
When speed is a serious factor it is generally obvious from the results of the crash anyway.
The black boxes from the American Eagle jet and the black hawk helicopter have been recovered and will be used to figure out what happened, hopefully helping to prevent future tragedies.
Because it's only incidentally about the user(s) or public's safety. That only happens so much at those goals incidentally overlap with keeping the OEMs "safe" from regulators and ambulance chasing lawyers.
For cars sold nowadays, users can deactivate that every time they turn the car on, but the default cannot be changed without vendor specific OBD commands.
You should complain to your car manufacturer as it is a cheat to comply with emission regulation. If they meet it without it can be permanently disabled by the user.
This is wrong. You can turn them off. Even DRL. If your car cannot you should complain to the manufacturer or live in one of the very few states requiring it.
> engine turns off when stationary
My previous car had a button specifically to disable it and it did so permanently. My current one doesn't need to.
> car brakes on its own
This is a manufacturer choice. Buy another car. Mine can be user disabled permanently.
> signals left/right at least 3 times
Manufacturer choice, usually for the non-flip indicator mechanic, which you likely can configure. If you flip it fully it might only do one, you should try it.
The starters used in start/stop vehicles are far more robust than normal ones, and start/stop in hybrids often don't even use the normal starter to turn the engine over. Because vehicles are often kept for quite some time, most start-stop systems will autodisable after a certain number of cycles, so that they only use a given portion of the starter's expected life. (disables the start/stop system, not the starter itself)
Theoretically yes, however:
Currently Honda has a recall for ~40K vehicles as their start stop ends with stall.
Kia & Hyundai : 92,000 vehicles because the electronic controller for the Idle Stop & Go oil pump assembly may contain damaged electrical components that can cause the pump controller to overheat.
Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling certain 2017-2019 Pacifica vehicles equipped with engine stop/start systems. A loose battery ground connection may result in an intermittent loss of power steering assist and/or a stall.
You add more complexity and there is more chance for things to break.
Also consider "Value" engineering, I can't find any data but I would be interested to see if the warranty periods for auto idle starters are longer or shorter than for the old style.
We saw this play out with the DEF system for engines, the systems were supposed to be robust and instead you end up with systems that break, harder to diagnose due to lockdown, and premature failure of components. I personal know of one manufacturer where the DEF tanks started failing after 6 months, the ammonia in the DEF was ingress into the sensors. This only started 2 years ago, so well after the systems were introduced.
Don't know, only one I've any experience of is Kia's which seems to use some sort of flywheel. I did look into it briefly, but all I found was indications that it saved over the life of the vehicle and wasn't shown to increase replacements (but that might only be that specific tech).
Which government, what car feature?
It sounds like idling shutoff that saves you money, reduces pollution, and reduces fuel consumption, eg when you stop to wait for traffic lights?