this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
9 points (57.1% liked)

Conservative

364 readers
3 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I know I posted about this yesterday, but this article does a much better job than I can.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PizzaMane@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

A decently designed device would be able to account for bad roads by comparing vibration in the X and Y axis versus the yaw and roll of the vehicle. Progressive's device isn't that.

If the system they end up designing is capable of accurately telling the difference, then it seems to me to be a good safety feature. Otherwise, sure, it is a terrible idea.

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The question being presented isn't "Is it possible to design a solution?" The question is "Will the corporate stooges involved bother to implement that solution?" As shown by the Progressive doodad, they probably won't.

[–] PizzaMane@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Corporations won't. But the proposed system is being designed by the government.

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The same government that said "Big vehicles can pollute more" which caused our SUV and big truck epidemic? That government? You'll have to forgive me for thinking they will just have the auto industry design it for them, like they have with laws surrounding fuel mileage and pollution standards.

[–] PizzaMane@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Would you be saying this in response to regulation requiring seatbelts?

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Does a seat belt allow someone to remotely disable the car? Try a different strawman.

[–] PizzaMane@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

This policy doesn't remotely shut down cars either.