patrick.net

https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/3/22607890/infrastructure-impaired-driving-provision-federal-standard-transportation

On Sunday, a bipartisan group of Senators published draft text of a massive new bipartisan infrastructure bill, proposing more than a trillion dollars in spending and a vast array of far-reaching provisions. But a little-noticed section in the bill could have significant implications in the fight against drunk driving, eventually mandating a new in-car safety technology to actively prevent Americans from driving while impaired.

https://time.com/6086981/bipartisan-infrastructure-bill-breathalyzers/

Buried in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill: In-Car Breathalyzers

blackpilled says

Buried in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill: In-Car Breathalyzers

As with anything in life, 20% do things well and 80% don't. So punish the 20%. I can be responsible enough to have a couple beers over 3 hours and drive a vehicle. Morons and government get to dictate my life though. And no, I don't condone DRUNK driving. There is a difference.

Oh and the people most likely to drive drunk already have a work around. Something as simple as pulling a fuse. As with anything it will be reverse engineered and figured out for those that like to get plastered and drive.

I'll be buying used cars for the next decades without any "tech". Current one is 2003

You say "cameras" - I say "duck tape". =))

I’m going to keep my Volvo S60 T5 forever, fuck a new car.

The worst case scenario is the engine blows up at 300,000 miles or so.
I’ll have a new one sent from Sweden or they rebuild it, no problem.

I love it, it’s solid like a tank but goes fast as hell and is a dream on the freeway.

clambo says

I’m going to keep my Volvo S60 T5 forever, fuck a new car.

The worst case scenario is the engine blows up at 300,000 miles or so.
I’ll have a new one sent from Sweden or they rebuild it, no problem.

I love it, it’s solid like a tank but goes fast as hell and is a dream on the freeway.

I like Volvos, had an 84 station wagon, that thing was a tank and would run no matter what. But Volvo has been owned by Ford since 99, so your engine would likely come from the US.

Make sure you get something that predates the whole "OnStar" generation. With that tech, the car answers to whoever controls that upstream service, even if you don't subscribe to that feature.

"Car won't start, you say? Hmm, let me see here... It looks like your 4th booster shot is past due. Your auto privileges will be reinstated once you go get yourself updated."

It's got to be relatively easy to disable these things.

There will be a market for new car "cleaning" of surveillance devices.

Patrick says

It's got to be relatively easy to disable these things.

There will be a market for new car "cleaning" of surveillance devices.

Not if car won’t drive with them disabled… or some law making it a felony…

I like fixing things. I have a 1999 Miata that I do all the work on. (it's not a sports car, it's a race car!). It failed smog 3 times. I tried everything! I took apart the intake manifold and scrubbed all of the carbon out. I replaced the O2 sensor, the mass airflow sensor (it was faulty) and of course the air filter, tune up, and changed the oil. I gave it the "sea foam" treatment (the neighbors were not happy with the smoke) I tried everything I knew and could research but I could not get the pollutant numbers low enough to pass smog.

I gave up and took it to the Italian guy at the "Star" test and repair station down the street. I told him to keep it until it passed. Two hours and $300 later it passed. I will never try to mess with emissions again!

The point is, cars are already too complex and we do not need another level of possible failure points.

Fucking nanny state.

Fortwaynemobile says

Not if car won’t drive with them disabled… or some law making it a felony…

Bypass or remove that shit for everyday driving. Put it back come yearly inspection time.They can't inspect every car every day.

FuckCCP89 says

Fortwaynemobile says

Not if car won’t drive with them disabled… or some law making it a felony…

Bypass or remove that shit for everyday driving. Put it back come yearly inspection time.They can't inspect every car every day.

I assume this is CA? Rural living is great. No emissions tests. I hated those days living in the city and close suburbs of IL. Out where I live we pollute the fuck out of the air. An artificial boundary really makes a difference on exhaust pollution.... said the dumbest person on the planet.

Whatever, no emissions tests for my cars. No complaints here.

This will gradually reduce the police departments income over time if it actually works. They make bank from DUI. I'm curious what they are thinking.

Second thought, I heard them talking on the radio about the $1MM lobbying spent by the company who makes it . The fuckers.

Patrick says

It's got to be relatively easy to disable these things.

There will be a market for new car "cleaning" of surveillance devices.

If it's a Ford I bet it can be disabled in ForScan. All you need is a laptop and the appropriate OBDII interface. Also one can simply find and unplug the offending device.

noobster says

Second thought, I heard them talking on the radio about the $1MM lobbying spent by the company who makes it

That's how it works. The problem is they call it lobbying. It's sales.

noobster says

This will gradually reduce the police departments income over time if it actually works. They make bank from DUI. I'm curious what they are thinking.

Cops and municipalities will find new ways to get revenue or go harder after existing laws. This would absolutely decimate new car sales though. I know some people understand, but there are a shit ton of people that drink for work. Not get paid for drinking, but events. My wife at this moment is golfing at an outing. I've attended a lot of them and 50% of them at 9:15am Central have likely already had their first beer. I drank and droned the event for marketing purposes in the past.

Most won't overdue it because it is a professional event with engineers. Of that 50% already having a beer or drink though, 90% wouldn't be able to start their car by the end if BAIID was installed. BAIID on cars would destroy other industries and networking. Drunk driving is awful and stupid. But I've met plenty of people I'd guesstimate were at .08-.12 and could drive a car like normal.

It would be a boon to Uber/Lyfte/Taxis though. We've 100% stopped driving to weddings. Out in CO for a couple shows at Red Rocks we paid $90 round trip two nights to get there, so $180 (split 3 ways). Basically any time we know it's gonna be a party, we make arrangements to not have to drive. I'll pay $10k over my lifetime for sure to ride share, but it's better than one DUI where I don't know the outcome. Could just be pulled over or could kill someone.

Alcohol is also not equal. I'll usually have two beers a night after dinner. I know others have said they'll have some wine. .08 to those people is not the same as someone that has a couple beers or wines once a month. That's the problem with an arbitrary number. Get some 90lbs girl with two glasses of wine once a month and she could be plastered. I wouldn't even blink at 220lbs. Even being a non-alcoholic you will build a tolerance from those first two beers/wines whereas the 90lbs chick gets hammered/buzzed after one and would blow .04 and should not be driving.

WookieMan says

I assume this is CA?

US. Federal bill.

FuckCCP89 says

WookieMan says

I assume this is CA?

US. Federal bill.

Yeah, won't happen. Prohibition failed miserably. Big auto will kick this in the nuts for sure. They need to sell cars and drunk drivers sell new cars.

Also, there's the assumption it would be accurate and work correctly. It won't. Tire pressure sensors and check engine light on every car I've owned has lit up with zero actual issue. My local mechanic will plug in and do the diagnostic test for free. I can check my own tire pressure. There's never an actual problem. My 2 recent cars have over 200k miles.

HunterTits says

And if you all think this is really about drunk driving

mileage tax on IC vehicles or something like that incoming.

Patrick says

It's got to be relatively easy to disable these things.

Doubt it, cars are too computerized these days. Just program it in a way that no reading on the sensor=no driving.

I’m actually OK with this now that I have kids. Woulda sucked in my 20s… but with door dash, Amazon, uber, soon to be self driving cars…there’s no need to drink at all and drive. And disabling truly drunk morons from driving is a good thing.

I weigh 190lbs… I can still drink a 2-3 beers and be below .08 anyway.

It's just another thing that will increase he cost of new vehicles while making them less reliable.

HunterTits says

mell says

But Volvo has been owned by Ford since 99, so your engine would likely come from the US.

I thought it was Saab Ford owned.

Saab was owned by GM.

Volvo was owned by Ford before it became owned by CCP.

https://notthebee.com/article/did-you-know-bidens-new-infrastructure-bill-would-require-alcohol-monitors-to-be-installed-in-all-new-cars

No, this won't be the end of drunk driving. It really won't. This will do nothing except give government authorities greater power over the free travel of individuals.

It will also raise the price of vehicles, create expensive systems that are prone to failure, and force a good portion of the population such as myself to never buy a new car (which I'm sure the auto industry wouldn't like).

I can foresee trying to start your car late at night for many reasons, if this system has a fault you are stranded. Even if it were an emergency situation you are screwed (mom going into labor I.e.). When other vehicle systems break or malfunction, an indicator light turns on and likely the vehicle still operates. Not the case with this. This is a safety hazard, honestly. The drunk drivers will still find a way to drink and drive, "here's twenty bucks if you help me start my car, kid". Another stupid law that will have unintended consequences.

Also I remember a chart I came across at some point a while back. The drunk drivers killing people were something like 5 times the legal limit. The people just over are not the ones killing others.

noobster says

Another stupid law that will have unintended consequences.

The lobbyist for this latest intrusion on your right to privacy is very happy no doubt.

As is the company that hired him.

noobster says

I can foresee trying to start your car late at night for many reasons, if this system has a fault you are stranded. Even if it were an emergency situation you are screwed (mom going into labor I.e.). When other vehicle systems break or malfunction, an indicator light turns on and likely the vehicle still operates. Not the case with this. This is a safety hazard, honestly. The drunk drivers will still find a way to drink and drive, "here's twenty bucks if you help me start my car, kid". Another stupid law that will have unintended consequences.

Also I remember a chart I came across at some point a while back. The drunk drivers killing people were something like 5 times the legal limit. The people just over are not the ones killing others.

This and GMC, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, etc. won't let it happen. I'd guess 50% of the people buying brand new cars drink and drive. New cars ain't cheap and to make money you have to network, networking mean drinking in all honesty. 9 out of 10 times that means drinking if you're looking to make a sale or connection.

Maybe 10% of the wealthy I know abstain from alcohol totally. 50% drink frequently and drive. It's engrained in all cultures. Even Islam. Maybe not the devout, but booze is everywhere. 1/2 the people I know have DUI's. Way more common than people think or know. If you attribute 1 DUI to every person for example, I'd bet the number is over 100%.

Either way I don't drink and drive. I drive like grandma because I leave on time and have no interest in driving fast. I drive a tank basically. So I just chill. Open the roof and jam out to some tunes. Can't stand driving and that's the only way I can. Weed is legal here in IL and I've been to the dispensary once. I've been to more in CO and WA. I just don't like driving in general. It pisses me off and I don't need that.

CA started emissions testing to test emissions. Yet they will fail you if you have a check engine light on. When I had my check engine light on the test would say "emissions pass" "vehicle fail" reason: "check engine light on".

So now I have to fix my vehicle when the issue was the computer and not emissions. $3,000 to fix something that has nothing to do with emissions.

Patrick says

https://notthebee.com/article/did-you-know-bidens-new-infrastructure-bill-would-require-alcohol-monitors-to-be-installed-in-all-new-cars

No, this won't be the end of drunk driving. It really won't. This will do nothing except give government authorities greater power over the free travel of individuals.

Of course it won't. Like nobody can use an air pump or fill up a bag with air. These things are so stupid.

Fortwaynemobile says

Not if car won’t drive with them disabled… or some law making it a felony…

OK, you haven't worked in the embedded field. Sensors just take environmental input and produce output in the form of some digital data.

All you have to do is send the right digital data.

Michael Cooke says

CA started emissions testing to test emissions. Yet they will fail you if you have a check engine light on. When I had my check engine light on the test would say "emissions pass" "vehicle fail" reason: "check engine light on".

So now I have to fix my vehicle when the issue was the computer and not emissions. $3,000 to fix something that has nothing to do with emissions.

One of CARB cunts was caught on a hot mic admitting that since cars don't rust in California making them fail the "emissions" test is the only way to make people retire their old cars and buy new ones, sending shitload of sales tax money into state's coffers.

Michael Cooke says

CA started emissions testing to test emissions. Yet they will fail you if you have a check engine light on. When I had my check engine light on the test would say "emissions pass" "vehicle fail" reason: "check engine light on".

So now I have to fix my vehicle when the issue was the computer and not emissions. $3,000 to fix something that has nothing to do with emissions.

Do you have to have working TPMS?
That is if your car came with TPMS from the factory.

Booger says

Do you have to have working TPMS?
That is if your car came with TPMS from the factory.

TPMS doesn't count.

https://theintercept.com/2021/08/05/infrastructure-bill-travel-data-cars-privacy/

INFRASTRUCTURE BILL COULD ENABLE GOVERNMENT TO TRACK DRIVERS’ TRAVEL DATA
The government would keep track of drivers’ travel in a test program to charge per-mile fees to raise revenue for the Highway Trust Fund.

Patrick says

The government would keep track of drivers’ travel in a test program to charge per-mile fees to raise revenue for the Highway Trust Fund.

That will have to occur once electric cars supersede gasoline taxes.

In the movie "I, Robot", Will Smith starts driving a car and the woman he's with says: "You're driving MANUALLY?!?"
I like autopilots - I used them in airplanes every day. Cars kill about 40k in the USA every year. If this was a virus, we'd be making a vaccine, You can't fix stupid - but you can make safety a priority. Teslas are already the safest cars on the road, that's a fact.

Tesla has the 5th largest supercomputer on the planet and very smart people working on the self driving car problem. Elon Musk says once cars are 10x safer than humans, why would you drive? Sure, if you want to have fun, go to a track or somewhere like Montana or Canada. Kill yourself, just don't take anyone else with ya. We'll still have to clean up the mess you made, idiot.

Insurance Companies will also sort this out. A lot of auto insurance companies will go under and the bigger ones will charge higher rates for non-self driving cars.

That's neglecting though software bugs and malicious intrusion. If the computer worked 100% of the time and would be impenetrable then it's clear it's fsr safer than a human, simply because humans drove with emotions, impaired and get distracted. I'd be fine with higher rates but once everyone or most are on self driving cars you will see the true rate of accidents and tampering. Humans and computer assisted driving can complement each other, but the human should always be able to override.

Onvacation says

I like fixing things. I have a 1999 Miata that I do all the work on. (it's not a sports car, it's a race car!). It failed smog 3 times. I tried everything! I took apart the intake manifold and scrubbed all of the carbon out. I replaced the O2 sensor, the mass airflow sensor (it was faulty) and of course the air filter, tune up, and changed the oil. I gave it the "sea foam" treatment (the neighbors were not happy with the smoke) I tried everything I knew and could research but I could not get the pollutant numbers low enough to pass smog.

I gave up and took it to the Italian guy at the "Star" test and repair station down the street. I told him to keep it until it passed. Two hours and $300 later it passed. I will never try to mess with emissions again!

The point is, cars are already too complex and we do not need another level of possible failure points.

Fucking nanny state.

Love it, someone else on the site that drives older cars and does their own work.

I have a 2001 Lexus. I bought it for $13,000 in 2011 and have no plans to make any changes for the foreseeable future.

But I’m in a minority that won’t depreciate the latest greatest shiny thing because the neighbor has it. I’m not holding that hot potato.