General_Effort

Continental Europe had worse copyright laws since the 19th century. The US founding fathers were enlightenment age idealists, hence the copyright clause. European copyright laws were created by authoritarian empires. It's a major reason why we can't do tech. And I suspect also why Europe can't answer to the dominance of US culture.

Legal theft like the Mickey-Mouse-Protection-Law is controversial in the US. In the EU, it goes by without comment. That ends up giving casual observers an exactly reverse impression of the legal and social situation. Same for a lot of issues.

Very minor. They are simply not illegal at present. This does not put a check on lawmakers wanting to outlaw or "regulate" them.

a) The EU extended copyright before the US. It went even further than the US by reviving previously expired copyrights.

b) The relevant copyrights are expired in most of Europe. They still exist in the NL because of a special exemption granted by lawmakers.

What would you consider sufficient to confirm the story?

That reddit comment makes no sense.

Hah. I don't even know if you mean Thiel or the guy behind Axel Springer.

There are no ads on that site. It is a press release by the company and not a press report. They make no money of your clicks.

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.