• General_Effort@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      The manufacturers make money. They have lobbied for it. See that press release: https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/advanced-driver-distraction-warning-systems-071000637.html

      Maybe local car manufacturers appreciate a barrier for importing foreign cars.

      But maybe it is simply bad law-making. The law requires such a system. It does not require that it works. Many regulations in Europe are like that.

      Partly that may be because industry likes it that way. If they were held accountable for deaths caused by their cars, they would have to do open-ended research. They might be held accountable for sneaky maneuvers. They might have to implement unpopular features, which the politicians would not like either cause voters. This way, they just tick boxes on a compliance checklist. It doesn’t matter if it works. That’s called “legal certainty”. Everyone says how important that is.

      But I’m sure, in many cases it is simply incompetence. Neither the politicians nor the bureaucrats who write the laws know what they are doing. Clueless people often try to compensate by micromanaging. They don’t know the problems that causes. In fairness, the actual experts work for the industry that is being regulated. You can’t trust those guys. So there’s no reason to believe the experts when they say something is a bad idea. They say that about anything that costs them money.

    • trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      That it can be ignored and doesn’t distract the driver from driving.

      Sooner or later, even the obnoxious warning systems will be ignored, because alarm fatigue is a thing.

      • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        A warning syszem should not be able to be ignired easily. A warning system you can block out is not a working warning system.

        Holy shit, I got to spell out every little obviousness today.

        • trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago

          An unreliable warning system that spams you with useless distracting warnings shouldn’t exist at all. If stupid politicians mandate such systems by law, the smart choice by responsible manufacturers is making them easily ignoreable to avoid alarm fatigue leading to users ignoring actually reliable and important warning systems.

          • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            An unreliable warning system that spams you with useless warnings shouldn’t exist at all.

            YES! ESACTLY WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY!

            • trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              The real problem is the legal mandate for those warning systems.

              I recently had the (dis)pleasure of experiencing such a warning system in the shape of automatic speed limit recognition myself, but fortunately, the manufacturer of the vehicle in question did the responsible thing and allowed for adjusting the volume of the warning tone so far down you can barely hear it, because the system is a pile of junk (what else is really to be expected from a system based on cameras and image recognition?) and doesn’t recognise half the signs relevant to speed limits you pass.