434
And here I was thinking these blow-and-go contraptions were self contained. I should have known better.
They want to be able to remotely disable vehicles, but in the process have made us vulnerable to all sophisticated actors to do so. Our leaders have their priorities all screwed up.
Once again proving backdoors are fucking idiotic.
Not sure that I would really agree that these are backdoor. Since disabling the vehicle remotely is kinda the express intention of this device. Just a consequence of how they designed them to not be circumvented by the operator.
Why is remote access the intention? Should the device not verify the alchohol % locally and then mechanically allow the car to star or not? What part of that needs any form of remote oversight?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Since disabling the vehicle remotely is kinda the express intention of this device
Uhhh nope, there's no reason for a remote connection.
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
It makes sense - a self-contained device can be circumvented. A connected solution is much, much harder to fool
Please explain further because I do not believe that.
Someone knowledgeable enough could tamper with the local equipment to get it to give false negatives, or always pass regardless of blood alcohol content. If it doesn't phone home, the company (or the court) doesn't know it's been tampered with.
This is all theoretical, I know nothing about this tech.
It could phone home regularly without the ability to receive command to disable the car. Sounds like lazy enforcement.
I agree with you in principle but you could just have the person show up once a week for tamper checking. Those interlock devices are punishment for DUI/DWI so making the user show up once a week wouldn’t be too harsh, imo.
load more comments
(2 replies)
If somebody is good enough to tamper with the part that checks for BAC, why not also tamper with the part that phones home? Would they even need to?
The device doesn't just phone home while driving. It does it constantly. It's likely that any tampering would alert the vendor and by proxy the court.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is a great story to illuminate the large number of problems that could be addressed by decent public transit, better options for walking and biking, etc.
Boo for the cyber attack but fuck people who drive drunk repeatedly to the point of needing an interlock device. Maybe don't drink and drive you fucking sack of shit.
Fuck the lock, ban them from driving. Inexcusable.
Perfect solution. Really needs public transit or walkable cities to work so win-win.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Driving under the influence is a ban able offence (reckless endangerment) in most countries.
So is a proper driver's ed before giving even a learner's permit. US loves giving a multi ton killing machine to untrained people with impulse control. And teenagers
I agree with you, but the difference is that, in the US, people NEED to be able to drive to function in society. That's why the bar has to be so low to get a license.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Comments sections. Where nuance goes to die. All context is flattened and your views must be expressed as black or white lest you get branded as having the wrong opinion.
Amen, Lemmy is in the starting stages of how reddit went my brother. It's inherent to the format
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Not-so hot take: the underlying issue is lack of public transportation.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I know someone that did it once and having to have one of these as a result. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.
Nope, shouldn't of done it once. Pretty easy to not drink and drive.
I too have never had a time sensitive emergency
What kind of emergency is more important than the lives of people that might be killed by a drunk driver's mistake? And how is it impossible to find an alternative solution?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
“I know someone who only did a murder once and they locked them right up. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.”
Replace murder with any crime.
If you don’t want to face the consequences, don’t do the action that begets the consequences.
TLDR: don’t fuck around if you don’t wanna find out.
Nice straw man. Murder != drunk driving.
Killing someone with your car = murder Fuck drink drivers!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Fun fact: In the US you can get a DUI for sleeping it off in your car, a passenger drinking while you drive (open container laws), or failing a bullshit coordination test graded by a racist cop without them ever checking your blood alcohol.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Having a breathalyzer is letting them off easy, they deserve to lose their license
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Never knew anyone who had one, but a friend of mine dated a guy who did. He would beg her to breathe into it for him.
That's insane but as an alcoholic I can absolutely see someone doing it.
Some are social butterflies who have to be out and about but talk about not learning lessons.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Hegseth is gonna be even more angry than ~~born~~ normal when he can't drive from point a to point b because of this.
That’s why he lives in the base. So he doesn’t have to admit he got his license revoked.
To be fair, I too would be angry had I been born normal.
Internet connected breathalyzer... May I ask why? If they need periodic recalibrations all of them don't need it right now no?
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
I had one disable my car in rush hour traffic in another city on a roadtrip, they had no way to do anything to get me back up and running. I assume this is for those kinds of cases. I was taking up a lane on the interstate with a cop staring at me, trying to hum the little fucker back to life while a tow truck came.
How are these people planning to drive? The cost of fuel is excruciating! If it wasn’t because of Operation Epstein Fury, driving may have been an option.
Only those cars that needed a breathalyzer for reasons.
Not much of a loss, I'd say.
2027 mandates every car have this. Its infuriating.
Per bidens Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, that's going to be every new car starting this year
Not sure how I didn't hear of this already. Apparently it's not necessarily a breathalyzer, but the proposals include a camera facing the driver to monitor them and passive monitoring of the air in the car.
I don't drunk drive and barely even drink, but that's horrifying. I can't believe this went under the radar for me.
More garbage that is going to break and cost thousands of dollars to fix in addition to all the violations of privacy. Cars are already advertising to people. Can you imagine if they put a camera inside the vehicle? Why not invest in public transit? That's a great way to decrease impaired drivers of all stripes as well as help people in general. All this does is funnel more money into auto makers. I am so upset that this is the first I'm hearing of it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
434 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
87325 readers
3061 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS