"Ain’t no snitches riding with us
Ol mo the mouth n***as could holler the front" - Lil’ Wayne
Ooh yes good patent it so other manufacturers won’t do it. It’s a win-win since I already wouldn’t want a ford
Edit: what it uses cameras to look at other vehicles??? That is much worse
Ooh yes good patent it so other manufacturers won’t do it.
Patents don’t necessarily stop other OEMs from using it. It just means they’ll have to pay Ford a fee to license it, themselves.
Yep, it snitches on other cars!
Let’s be real, close to a majority of Americans have no issue with their iPhone being used as part of a mesh tracking network, even if it helps abusers with airtags.
All they have to do is sell this to people as benefiting them, and they will gobble it up. Hell, chances are, insurance companies will start offering reduced rates if you drive one (and then they buy the data from Ford and increase rates with it).
The massive difference between AirTags and this is that AirTags (and the whole Find My network, it’s not only AirTags after all) actually provide a useful service to each participant, namely locating their things if they get lost somewhere. This does effectively nothing for you and will only ever fuck over other people (you could argue rightfully so, but still) and provides no value to anyone other than the police.
One wonders whether instance companies will incentivize these vehicles with lower rates.
For whatever the insurance companies deem a low rate driver, sure. But you can be sure that many drivers will be paying more once their insurance company sees how much time they stare at a TikTok videos what “driving”.
Actually. I do wish that phones would fucking tattle on people who can’t be bothered to watch where they’re going while operating 2 ton Hausfraupanzers.
Instead of paying 2000 dollars a month for your shitty lifted ford ranger you pay 1500 a month for your shitty lifted ford ranger, but the car will… SHUT THE FUCK UP, WHERE DO I SIGN?
Ooh that’s gonna get your car keyed.
You have a strange way of writing molotov cocktailled.
I was gonna say, they are getting keyed with bullets
The key that opens anything.
Welcome to UPS trucks.
And Amazon, and FedEx, and UPS, and DHL…
I a totally meant FedEx. But I thought they were the only ones with police contracts?
They all have telematics in their trucks, and I know they all use the data in the case of accidents to prove fault. Amazon specifically monitors speed and will fire drivers if they do it too much. Wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if they started sharing that info.
Oh yea, on the same page, it’s just that FedEx specifically have been proven to hold contracts with law enforcement, while the others have not.
WKRC - Cincinnati Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Name: WKRC - Cincinnati Bias: Right-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wkrc-cincinnati-bias/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.Footer
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
Ford trying to patent a way to bankrupt themselves for when no one ever buys another ford ever again.
Don’t worry, the federal government will bail them out.
gotta syphon that money out of government somehow.
Ford could put all their R&D money into developing low-cost EVs, but they’d prefer to give the cops a handout.
Maybe a natural consequence but better than that would be low profile vehicles
Ford could put all their R&D money into developing low-cost EVs,
Thus making the EVs very expensive… just sayin’
Edit: I don’t know why you are downvoting. These are economic realities as they exist today. More R&D => greater costs => higher price. Fully Automated Luxury Communism is, unfortunately, not a likely reality in our lifetimes.
Then how do any low-cost vehicles ever get developed?
By minimizing costs, including R&D. Further, the lower the price the lower the profit and usually the lower the margin. Companies are not incentivitized to make less money.
This is pretty basic stuff…
Companies are not incentivitized to make less money.
If only it were physically possible to change that. Alas, the fifth law of thermodynamics says profit above all.
If only it were physically possible to change that. Alas, the fifth law of thermodynamics says profit above all.
It is possible to change it, of course, but every attempt thus far has ended in authoritarian political systems with even less opportunity for you to be housed, fed and well cared for, much less able to get things like affordable EVs.
I’m pretty convinced, sadly, that this is mainly because humans basically suck.
Maybe if we didn’t make city streets as wide as highways, people wouldn’t drive so fast. I feel like it’s obvious that people will drive faster between painted lines than if those lines were walls. Even lining a street with trees lowers speeds. An indirect side effect would be a drop in ticket revenue, but surely the police department would prefer safety over money.
Having been in places with narrow streets and walls right there… Nope. Doesn’t stop them.
I’m starting my attack run
surely the police department would prefer safety over money.
Great, investors have a target to short sell in the car industry based on Fords bad product development
This idea seems like what someone would come up with if they’re devoid from the reality of driving and have only been chauffeured around lol
Yeah, nobody would willingly buy this. I certainly wouldn’t. Never mind the obvious perpetual privacy violation baked right in to a hairbrained scheme like this, but could you ever fully trust it to work correctly and not ever randomly (or not-so-randomly) send people up for prosecution under false pretenses? I guarantee you the speed tattle system will be a black box, some dipshit legislator would pass a law making fucking with it or reverse engineering it a crime “because safety,” and then any time the state wants to harass anyone they can just ping somebody’s Ford to spit out a false speeding ticket (maybe even one that’s egregious enough to count as a felony like 130 in a 25, or whatever). And how are you going to be equipped to argue against it? It’s going to be your word against the computer and Ford’s army of lawyers and experts plus the police, in a system that’s already heavily stacked against the defendant.
This will probably only see any actual use being built into police cars and maybe commercial fleets, but not civilian vehicles.
Maybe they are patenting this just so that no one else can make it! Because they are generous kind hearted people, right? Right?.. Omg :(
deleted by creator
If they program in an exception to not report other Fords it could become a competitive advantage.
Nope it just takes one jurisdiction to mandate a reporting system is used and then they have a captive market.
but what if I only went above limit for 1 second by mistake? vigilante snitching is not the police to decide to give me ticket
GM will be patenting LED windshields showing the middle-finger and blurring the license plate every time a Ford passes by.
Not gonna lie, I’ve encountered enough F150 drivers to make this option tempting.
Edit: I’m wrong, now I diverted rtfa. it’s a camera system to detect other cars. My bad.
I don’t understand your comment. GM own ford, right? And the data they are trying to share comes from the car itself, not other cars around it.
No, GM owns Chevrolet, GMC, and Cadillac.
Ford is Lincoln, mercury and Mazda
They could make a system that doesn’t allow the vehicle to speed but I guess allowing it and then snitching is better
You should probably read articles before commenting. The cars aren’t reporting themselves.
That sounds like a really bad idea. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to go over the limit situationally.
Especially when other drivers could potentially put you in harms way that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to evade.
Also what if you need to rush to the hospital and don’t have time for an ambulance? Not great but better than someone dying because they didn’t get attention in time.
Even ambulances aren’t supposed to speed. They get their time savings with light switching devices and having traffic get out of the way. 99 percent of survivable medical crises have an hour to reach modern medicine as long as proper first aid has been applied.
It’s also almost universally better to slow down than speed up to avoid an accident. Braking changes your speed far faster than speeding up. It also gives you better traction, (literally it loads the front turning wheels with extra weight), and makes a hit more survivable.
We all want to feel like we’re in a Hollywood movie, but we just aren’t.
I really think you are missing the point here. You say overspeeding may save you, which i think is a very theorical and not frequent occurence but ok, for the sake of argument let’s allow 20kmh above the maximum speed limit, in my country that would be 150kmh, enough to get out of dangerous situation, still way bellow what modern car can do. And you really dont want to go above this kind of speed in urban environments if you’re not a trained professional. Speed limit exist for a reason which extends beyond “when you agree with them” raming in another car and transforming a 1 people emergency into a multiple people one is not a risk we should consider acceptable.
I agree that there’s rarely a good reason to speed. However, most speed limits are fairly arbitrary. Some are too fast, some are too slow.
The arbitrary speed limits are often because many city planners still use the 80th percentile rule. Basically, they do a traffic study, then set the limit at what 80% of people are comfortable driving at. So that means 20% will naturally feel like they can go faster. And as they reach the 99th percentile, they’ll feel like they can go much faster.
The issue with this 80th percentile thing is that it has very little grounding in traffic safety or reality; Many roads are needlessly wide and give drivers an unrealistic sense of safety. They’ll feel like they can go 40 or 50MPH, when it’s really a street that is cutting through a neighborhood and is frequented by children playing, bike riders, etc…
And the individual driver is not the arbiter of that. Just because someone feels the speed limits are wrong doesn’t justify speeding
While i dont necessarily agree with you, it is not my point. I am not saying we should limit the speed according to local speed limit, just that there is no reason ever for an individual car to go above 150kmh (or whatever the highest allowed speed in a country+15% is)
Speed limits are set according to a number of factor from noise, local crash history, density of pedestrians, threshold of the safety equipments (such as rails) , willingness of the governing body to review it, etc While some are not good, I would definetly argue that not all the reasons can be assessed from the driver perspective.
What’s especially hilarious is that my Ford Escape reads speed limit signs and then adjusts the cruise control to the new limit +5mph. They let you adjust that setting up to +/- 10mph, iirc.
Well yeah, they have to allow you wiggle room to knowingly break the law. How else are they going to maintain the partnership with law enforcement?
Heh. Guess theyre tired of making money
They already have to implement a system to shut off the car if “drunk driving is detected” by law
I haven’t heard of that. How does it work? It shuts the car off if you swerve a lot?
Do you have a source I could read more about this?
The law doesn’t say how it should work at all. This source seems the least biased I’ve seen on it
Right? Why the hell would I buy a vehicle that’s going to report me to the police?
They’re probably waiting for this tech to be required by law and make a lot of cash on the patent.
Because it will not report you. It will report others it sees on the road - except Fords.
If I have to buy a “new” car someday, I’m cutting off every antenna I see.
Unable to contact servers; boot loop, car won’t start; manufacturer sues you for breaking licensing agreement with unapproved modifications
Classic cars for me then
my classic car is a 2005😎
That’s why we need right to repair
And a corporate death penalty, if I had my druthers.
I’m against the death penalty, so corporate disbandanment
Unfortunately just like your cell phone we don’t really need external antennas anymore. In a lot of cases there’s not even a wire inside you can easily cut, just traces deep on the board
What I’ve been reading about on that subject is that cars often have a Telematics Control Unit or TCU that can actually be disabled if you can find it. It’s a box that plugs in to the wiring harness. They also have antennas that could be connected by a wire that you could locate, giving us another option to disable them by just disconnecting the antenna wire. That way the TCU could still talk to the main computers but not be able to send out its data.
If it doesn’t have a wire you could always put in a little faraday cage.
