• Lower_Kick268B
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The idea of a “GPS Speed Tracker Tech Delete” sounds like such a dystopian idea, i guess maybe its not that far off from what the reality could be

  • TheHoodedSomalianB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Taking away driver’s ability to take evasive maneuvers seems problematic, from an unintended consequence standpoint. I have narrowly avoided dangerous situations by speeding up to get away, etc.

    May initially say they’ll reserve it for situations like this but once it’s in there they won’t stop tooling with using it more and more not to mention the privacy’s risks. If they can alter your speed via GPS then they’ll surely have records of every second of your driving.

    I don’t see how this ever comes to fruition with the potential of abuse. I mean could I see a short range say bluetooth kill switch police can only activate within range but feel that’s still pushing it.

  • RiftHunter4B
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    ISA technology relies on a car’s GPS location and matches it to a database of posted speed limits and onboard cameras to come up with the legal speed limit. Passive ISA systems warn a driver when the vehicle exceeds the speed limit through sound, visuals or haptic alerts, leaving the driver responsible for slowing the car. Active systems might make it more difficult to increase the speed of a vehicle, or even fully limit it from going, above a posted speed limit.

    Privacy nightmare. We still haven’t done anything about cars getting hacked and now you want a system that can override my inputs? HELL NAW.

  • fastest_texan_driverB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    First they came for the unbuckled drivers, and I did not speak out because I was not a unbuckled driver.

    Then they came for the distracted drivers, and I did not speak out because I was not a distracting driver.

    Then they came for the drunken drivers, and I did not speak out because I was not a drunken driver.

    Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.

  • BobbyNewhartFaceB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I will never own or drive a car that has this. I live in a state that doesn’t do inspections, definitely would pay to have it disabled. If I need to pass, I need to pass. Preventing me to speed up for whatever reason can be a safety issue as well. What if I have to speed to get into the only safe spot while merging? The roads aren’t really built perfectly engineering wise to make this work.

    4 lanes wide and every one is going the same speed. The only way to change lanes to get over is going to be to slow down. Even if the system lets you go 10 over, still…4 lanes wide everyone’s gonna do the same speed.

    Why have a system that lets you go slower than traffic but not faster? Going slower in 80mph zones is also dangerous. While saving lives from super high speed accidents, my guess is this will probably cause more accidents in general. Maybe slower, but the average of accidents will probably go up. And a pile up with 200 cars at 80mph is still a pile up at 80mph.