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.
Cyberattack on vehicle breathalyzer company leaves drivers stranded across the US
Submitted 2 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Fuck the lock, ban them from driving. Inexcusable.
iSeth@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Perfect solution. Really needs public transit or walkable cities to work so win-win.
kunaltyagi@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
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
ChillCapybara@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
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.
MIDItheKID@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
So… Just tell them that it’s illegal for them to drive? Kind of like how we tell them that it’s illegal to drink and drive but they did that anyway? The point of the lock is that it’s for people who are going to ignore the law anyway. Not having a license does not stop somebody from operating a motor vehicle.
MIDItheKID@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Not-so hot take: the underlying issue is lack of public transportation.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
100% for most places. However I’ll say Ive known alot of folks who will go up into the bush and get blasted only to drive home. I doubt transit would stop that shit.
plz1@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I know someone that did it once and having to have one of these as a result. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Nope, shouldn’t of done it once. Pretty easy to not drink and drive.
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
“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.
kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Having a breathalyzer is letting them off easy, they deserve to lose their license
bold_atlas@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I know someone that DID IT ONCE and having to have one of these as a result. Suggest you reset your opinions a bit.
You mean he got caught once.
stickyprimer@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
TwilitSky@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
darkkite@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
you only need to get caught once for the lock
Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s a shame that it’s only when they get caught. There’s no excuse for driving drunk.
WesternInfidels@feddit.online 2 weeks ago
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.
ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Hegseth is gonna be even more angry than born normal when he can’t drive from point a to point b because of this.
criss_cross@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s why he lives in the base. So he doesn’t have to admit he got his license revoked.
UniversalBasicJustice@quokk.au 2 weeks ago
To be fair, I too would be angry had I been born normal.
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
A “cyberattack”? Or vibe coded AI slop running as intended?
Godric@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
A “great question”? Or just AI brain in action?
Only you can explain what the fuck youre talk g about/prevent wildfires
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
My goodness.
skulkbane@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Internet connected breathalyzer… Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
BanMe@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
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.
Treczoks@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Only those cars that needed a breathalyzer for reasons.
Not much of a loss, I’d say.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Per bidens Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, that’s going to be every new car starting this year
MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 2 weeks ago
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.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Passive systems, not a breathalyzer. Still fucking stupid but one can disable the cameras or stop the vehicle from phoning home. They won’t be able to disable your vehicle remotely and it appears to be more a while driving thing rather than a before driving thing.
bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
2027 mandates every car have this. Its infuriating.
ClydapusGotwald@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Hot take but if you need a breathalyzer to drive you don’t deserve to drive anymore.
pazuzuzu@leminal.space 2 weeks ago
I think it as undone, but there was a very serious plan to put breathalyzers in all cars. This cyberattack should give people some pause. jalopnik.com/the-in-car-breathalyzer-is-only-a-fe…
Godric@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Yessss, we need more tracking in your day to day because drunks, yesssss, or the children, yessss, or uh, err, uhhh, teenagers, yessssss!
Please give us all your data! For safety reasons, yesssssa
gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 weeks ago
Yeah, because it so much more smart to just buy another car if someone in your family need a breathalyzer to drive just because of a beer.
arcine@jlai.lu 2 weeks ago
That’s why you use the ones with the weird salt inside. No computer, no problem !
nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
drinking is some baby idiot garbage
Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
The first time I ever heard of/saw one of these things was in the show Pluribus, how common are they??
OldQWERTYbastard@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
And here I was thinking these blow-and-go contraptions were self contained. I should have known better.
teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
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.
teft@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
Once again proving backdoors are fucking idiotic.
unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Wait, are you telling me…
…that a device meant to disable a vehicle…
…was used to disable a vehicle?
Whould’ve thought?
JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
It makes sense - a self-contained device can be circumvented. A connected solution is much, much harder to fool
x00z@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Please explain further because I do not believe that.
Ulrich@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
If you want to circumvent it, it’s as simple as disconnecting it. Source: I’ve done it (professionally)
gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 weeks ago
It make sense only if there you keep in mind that there is no way to be sure that it will be always connected, which does not seems to be the case…