General_Effort

Probably, but it's certainly more complicated. Fiat complained about the added cost of such systems. On the low budget end, this adds a noticeable chunk to the price. Bad for sales in the EU, added complications for export. I could imagine the "premium brands" like such regulations that remove some competition.

The yahoo post in OP is a press release by a Swedish tech company that makes such systems. They're not exactly part of the car industry, but they claim to have lobbied for this.

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.

It was mandatory for new vehicle types since 2024. Now it is mandatory for all new vehicles, including old types.

Do you happen to know of any empirical studies on the effectiveness?

Since July 7, all new vehicles must have an "advanced driver distraction warning" (ADDW) system. That means that there will be a (probably IR) camera constantly monitoring the driver. AI will assess if they are looking at the road and, depending on speed, give a warning if they don't.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=PI_COM%3AC%282023%294523

Ahh. But the Ukrainian attack only happened because of a Russian attack, so...

This could be the greatest historical discovery since the Hitler Diaries!

Seriously, though. I have no idea how credible this is, but does it sound too good to be true?

IIRC the issue was that the relay can also function as a mirror/archive of posts. That's a lot of data and gets expensive.

Stories of Rassenschande, which denoted alleged scandals of Jewish men and German women having sex, were staples of Der Stürmer.[15] Streicher described Jews as sex offenders who were[12] "violators of the innocent, perpetrators of bizarre sex crimes, and ritual murderers", who allegedly performed in religious ceremonies using blood of other humans, usually Christians. Streicher also frequently reported attempts of child molestation by Jews. Der Stürmer never lacked details about sexual intercourse, names, and crimes to keep readers aroused and entertained. These accusations, articles, and crimes printed in Der Stürmer were often inaccurate, and rarely investigated by staff members. In the newspaper's opinion, if a German girl became pregnant by a Jew, the Jew would deny paternity, offer to pay for an abortion, fail to pay child support, or leave for the United States. Within Der Stürmer, it was not uncommon to read reports of German women aborting their children because they did not want to bring a "Jewish bastard into the world".[12]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_St%C3%BCrmer#Alleged_sexual_crimes

ridding society of parasites

That seems somehow familiar. Hmm. Where I have I heard that political rhetoric before? Whatever, it's only '26. I'm sure by '33 it will all come back.

Documented where? By who? I'd just like to know if there's anyone, some influencer or whatever, spreading this.

Sorry, your English isn't always quite clear.

You're saying that they will have to create that security layer that you call API, before releasing a modified Siri AI in the EU. Right? Which means that you don't see either what Apple could have done to roll this out now in the EU.

Why do you believe that? Where did you "learn" that?

If Apple needs 18 months to introduce a proposed solution then what they can do is they can release the new Siri in 18 months with the proposed solution implemented.

So you're agreeing with me?

Sheesh. I don't agree with the EU locking down Android. But I don't see either how it makes sense to punch this huge security hole into Apple's Walled Garden. Their customers expect, and pay for, a lot of hand-holding.

What risk?

That this is even a question, shows the problem with leaving it all to users.

We'll have to wait and see how Google responds to these demands. Android has been traditionally more open, but has recently been closed down more; not least because of EU demands for more security. It will be interesting.

Unclear what Apple could even do here.

The obvious answer would be, let people take the risk if they so chose. But the EU also demands security, so that isn't much of an option. It makes no sense.

Because parents vote?