Big Bother in 2026?

[Cuzoe]

Haha, I'm not concerned about them grandfathering in my old car. I care about being able to select that option and being one of the first do it.

 

[nosmirk]

Same here, had them in my house in Japan, bought a crappy when I got back to the states. Then bought nice ones when bought a place, and added outlets behind each toilet. The Toto S550 has everything you mentioned except the auto fragrance spraying (has a deodorizer/air filter though). The heated water is actually on-demand so it never runs out. Some bidets have tanks, which gives you a limited amount (time) of heated water. There are also hybrid systems which have a tank for instant hot water but also the coils that provide on-demand. My Brondell is on-demand only but it's already warm by the time you notice it's cold.

Yup, considering a 550 as well, or maybe a 350.
We have a lot of other things to do first before we get to the bathrooms, so there's plenty of time to decide.

 

[Corprin]

Intoxicated people aren't sneaking away to drive home, they leave less intoxicated folks and get in their cars every single day. The potential to be an accomplice, especially one that is very unlikely to be charged, is not a great (maybe not even good) deterrent. You'll have to live with it, and that will be awful, but people aren't thinking about all those potentially terrible outcomes when they let an intoxicated person get in the car or get behind the wheel themselves. If they were, and it made them not drive, or stop their friends from driving, or suggest a stranger get an Uber instead we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.

I'm also not sure how the camera would detect that you were drunk prior to starting the car... maybe require something akin to a field sobriety test? Add LED's to the camera housing that "instruct" you to look left-right-left (randomized), while also checking pupils? With determination and know how I would also imagine it could be tricked (you could just be lucky and guess the randomized left-right-left) but that isn't a reason not to put a safeguard in place.

A combination of breathalyzer (even with its problems) with the ability to prevent the car from starting that also requires random tests while driving, along with a camera for real time monitoring (for general signs that a person shouldn't be driving, not limited to intoxication) is likely the most "foolproof" method. Both the random breath tests and the camera monitoring would benefit from the ability to enable the hazards, tap the brakes/shake the wheel, pull over safely and/or slowly bring the car to a stop if needed. With semi-autonomous cars this is realistic, but not so much with older cars.

The left/right test you are referring to has nothing to do with dilation. Dilation typically indicates stimulants (cocaine) not depressants (alcohol).
You are thinking of horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) and is a very effective means of field sobriety testing. You can tell approximate BAC by the bounce of the eyes. Few people have a natural nystagmus, and have a medical card to indicate that.

My work computer has a camera that my employer can/does turn on time to time.

See my earlier post with regards to the negatives of a breathalyzer. I have one in my car right now... I don't drink and my wife is pregnant (baby dubber incoming) but one of our long time friends got a DUI. But for grace no one was hurt, she drifted over into a parked car. She doesn't have a car now though. But the DMV/judge doesn't really care about that and said she needed to have a breathalyzer installed on any car she might drive. She can't even drive an MT so she won't be driving my car but it has the breathalyzer installed.

I don't know how a camera could definitively determine a person is not intoxicated, so there is the concern of them starting the car and getting in an accident right away. But the breathalyzer can be defeated by a more sober person (or any occupant that does or cannot drive for any other reason) blowing. I suspect this scenario is person A is intoxicated and wants to leave in their car, person A and person B think person A is capable of driving, person B blows and person A drives away. There could be periodic tests while driving, but I think a camera is better in that situation.

does the DUI friend live with you, did she get the DUI in a car registered to your household, or did you volunteer that she’d be able to use your car?

I can’t think of any other path a court could impose an interlock on your car. I’m curious about this.

I've asked for a Toto Washlet S550 for Christmas, then the Brondell will go to the guest bathroom for the plebeians. With my new diet I require pre-misting of the bowl with electolyzed water before and after use.

I love my Toto.

 

[cagti]

Instead of monitoring everyone, the punishment for DUI should be far more severe than it currently is. Repeat DUI offenders are the problem. Punish them instead of slapping them on the wrist.

http://www.drunkdrivingstats.org/repeatdrunkdrivingoffenders.html

 

[Cuzoe]

@Corprin I'm not really referring to an any test, just musing about how this potential camera could work. I have no idea how any sobriety test works. I don't drink and so never concerned with myself with it. If we (the government) are going through the trouble of using a camera to gauge whether someone can safely drive why not check for everything (that can be checked) including dilation caused by uppers?

As for the interlock, she asked and I said sure. It doesn't hurt me any, besides being annoying. I've known her for 20+ years, my wife has known her for 15+, she's family as much as a friend. Doesn't live with us, and her name is not on anything we own. A person with a DUI, who does not want to wait the 2 years to get their license back, just has to show the DMV that they have an interlock device installed. That satisfies the DMV that they cannot drive while intoxicated.

The court had nothing to do with the interlock, she hasn't been to court yet. But I suppose when she goes to court they could tell her to get an interlock for some period of time as part of her sentence, which would be validated through the DMV. With the pandemic the courts are (more) backed up so for her it made sense to get the interlock as soon as possible. Not only does it mean her license is reinstated, but if the court rules she needs an interlock for 12 months she may already have 8 months done.

 

[Corprin]

@Corprin I'm not really referring to an any test, just musing about how this potential camera could work. I have no idea how any sobriety test works. I don't drink and so never concerned with myself with it. If we (the government) are going through the trouble of using a camera to gauge whether someone can safely drive why not check for everything (that can be checked) including dilation caused by uppers?

As for the interlock, she asked and I said sure. It doesn't hurt me any, besides being annoying. I've known her for 20+ years, my wife has known her for 15+, she's family as much as a friend. Doesn't live with us, and her name is not on anything we own. A person with a DUI, who does not want to wait the 2 years to get their license back, just has to show the DMV that they have an interlock device installed. That satisfies the DMV that they cannot drive while intoxicated.

The court had nothing to do with the interlock, she hasn't been to court yet. But I suppose when she goes to court they could tell her to get an interlock for some period of time as part of her sentence, which would be validated through the DMV. With the pandemic the courts are (more) backed up so for her it made sense to get the interlock as soon as possible. Not only does it mean her license is reinstated, but if the court rules she needs an interlock for 12 months she may already have 8 months done.

Didn’t mean to go all pedantic on the testing, just thought HGN is what you were referencing. Pupil dilation would have far too many variables to be effective. Ambient light, people’s specific dilation rates, and fuck you if you’re on your way home from getting your eyes checked at the optometrist. The HGN testing has a pupil feature but is testing for underlying neurological conditions/emergencies.

HGN, however, is too difficult to replicate without nervous system depressants/stimulants like alcohol/drugs. If administered correctly it is as flawless of a field test as you can get. Is is still insufficient to equate BAC, and only serves to provide probable cause for an arrest and later chemical testing. Honestly one could write an algorithm that would check HGN pretty effectively, that may take the argument of “did the officer do it to standard” out of the equation., don’t know. Been out of this game for over a decade, so I don’t even know if HGN is still favored. But, it’s a great party trick, and has convinced a few friends to get a ride home over the years... even done it on complete strangers at parties/weddings. Not one person has passed muster to date. Maybe because if you are worried you may not pass an FST, you’re probably too intoxicated to drive in the first place, and you needed that “expert opinion” from the same test your arresting officer would use. Don’t know, don’t care, they were off the road.

Biggest cause of DWI/DUI is the lack of personal responsibility, and not enough fear of harsh punishment.

I like Japan’s rule. .03 and you loose your car and license For a bit, heavy fine and likely a few weeks in jail at the minimum. .04 and up, bye bye license for life, even heavier fines, and a much longer prison stay. You simply don’t drink and drive there.

as for the interlock, that’s what I figured what happened, voluntarily. Your first post made it sound like a court ordered a your car have it installed because you have a friend with a DUI. Good on you. When my bestie got her second DUI and needed an interlock, I’d have told her to enjoy her walk.

none of this is legal advice, I’m not a lawyer.

 

[shovelhd]

Instead of monitoring everyone, the punishment for DUI should be far more severe than it currently is. Repeat DUI offenders are the problem. Punish them instead of slapping them on the wrist.

http://www.drunkdrivingstats.org/repeatdrunkdrivingoffenders.html

I was the foreman on a criminal jury prosecuting a DUI offender. He made a great case for himself. Here's the thing. You can't consider anything about his past when deciding his case. We didn't believe his story so we ended up convicting him. We found out afterwards that this was his SIXTH DUI, and this time, he was going to jail. Until the justice system takes DUI seriously, nothing will change.

 

[jimlloyd40]

I was the foreman on a criminal jury prosecuting a DUI offender. He made a great case for himself. Here's the thing. You can't consider anything about his past when deciding his case. We didn't believe his story so we ended up convicting him. We found out afterwards that this was his SIXTH DUI, and this time, he was going to jail. Until the justice system takes DUI seriously, nothing will change.

It was because of whatever state that was. The states set their own policies and penalties for DUI.

 

[GTIfan99]

I find Europe's extreme monitoring of its citizens to be an issue.

I've lived in Europe. The major European countries are far less police states than the US.

It's almost like most people don't know we are the most incarcerated country in the world.

It's also like most people don't realize that they purposely carry a GPS, video, recording monitoring device almost everywhere they go and detail everything thing they did , bought and ate on it daily.

 

[jimlloyd40]

I've lived in Europe. The major European countries are far less police states than the US.

It's almost like most people don't know we are the most incarcerated country in the world.

It's also like most people don't realize that they purposely carry a GPS, video, recording monitoring device almost everywhere they go and detail everything thing they did , bought and ate on it daily.

I make my phone as private as possible. Turn off location, history etc.

 

[GTIfan99]

I make my phone as private as possible. Turn off location, history etc.

You've done it, Jim. Completely thwarted the CIA.

 

[jimlloyd40]

You've done it, Jim. Completely thwarted the CIA.

I don't think the CIA is very interested in me.

 

[GTIfan99]

I don't think the CIA is very interested in me.

Shhhhhhhhj, they're listening.

Hey Alexa, how do I keep the CIA from bugging my house.

 

[jimlloyd40]

Shhhhhhhhj, they're listening.

Hey Alexa, how do I keep the CIA from bugging my house.

If the CIA is interested in me we have bigger national security concerns than I thought. Even Alexa ignores me half the time.

 

[GTIfan99]

If the CIA is interested in me we have bigger national security concerns than I thought. Even Alexa ignores me half the time.

I understand that. Just pointing out the absurdity of people freaking out about this when they happily give away their privacy to play Angry Birds or talk about VW's, etc...

Insert "I'll buy an old car they can't track" guy here. Sure dude, there aren't cameras every traffic light that can be used to track you.

The technology isn't going to stop. You better be far more careful about who you vote for and their moral character if you're worried, because you aren't going to stop technology.