Anticipating Government

Guest Post by Eric Peters

You may have wondered why it is that every 2024 model year vehicle – as in all of them – comes standard with a slew of “driver assistance technologies,” always marketed as being “advanced.” This being a form of the etymological deception-pressure tactics so pervasively used in politics. As in “progressive” politics. We’re forward-thinking, you see. And if you do not agree, well, then you are obviously a stick-in-the-mud at best and probably something worse.

You see?

It is thus “advanced” to have a car that “assists” (that is, controls) the driver. As to the why, an announcement the other day by Mitsubishi and TomTom – maker of portable GPS systems – heralding the very latest and most “advanced” driver assistance technology they’ve jointly developed, gives us a window into that.

Mitsubishi, TomTom Combine on Cockpit that Monitors Driver, Traffic reads the headline of the news story that fails to explain the why.

Among the “advances”:

A thermal camera can track biometric information to provide insight into short- and long-term changes to a driver’s physical status, triggering autonomous pullovers and alerts to emergency services if necessary.”

The article quotes Grygorii Maistrenko of Mitsubishi Electric Automotive, who says “the company’s FLEXConnect dashboard comes with virtual sensing powered by BlackBerry in an in-cabin system with an edge-to-cloud vehicle data platform. . . the collaboration will help advance road safety by utilizing sensor data to anticipate safety risks, reduce driver distractions, highlight potential driving hazards and enable new consumer experiences.”

Italics added.

Very “advanced,” indeed.

Can you think of anyone you know who wants to experience a car that collects their “biometric information”? That will “autonomously” pull itself over when it (or whoever controls it) decides you ought not to be driving? That alerts “emergency services” – i.e., police – when it decides your driving warrants such intervention?

Of course, there are people who very much want such “advances” to be standard equipment in every new vehicle. Including the wooden Indian who fronts for the panopticon Left that has taken control of the apparatus of control.

Government is all about control.

That – per Dr. Evil describing the role of his henchman, Random Task – is what it does.

But this does not explain why the car industry – and this means every single car company – has become something even worse than the government. Because none of them stand up to the government anymore, which is bad enough as it signals they’ll do whatever the government says – irrespective of the costs imposed on customers; irrespective, ultimately, of the costs imposed on them. (The obvious example here being the potentially catastrophic costs they’ve practically begged the government to impose on them in the form of the bum’s rush to turn vehicles into devices the majority of buyers want no part of.)

Worse, though, is this business of anticipating government.

Even before the termite-riddled wooden Indian hurled the fatwa (written by others, of course) requiring that by 2026 – only a little more than one model year from now – all new vehicles will have “advanced technology” that monitors and corrects “driver performance” – The parameters of the latter laid down by the same people who wrote the fatwa signed off on by the termite-riddled wooden Indian who moves like Old Chief Woodenhead from Creepshow – most new cars already have such “advanced technology.”

Many cars have had it for years.

In other words, the car companies have anticipated the fatwa. They have developed the “technology” on their own and have been embedding it as standard equipment in cars before any requirement came down forcing them to do this.

And absent any appreciable market demand for such “technology.”

There are, no doubt, a few car buyers who would willingly opt (and pay for) such “advanced technology.” Just as, back in the early ’70s, there were a few car buyers who willingly opted for (and paid extra for) air bags, which were then available in a few GM and Chrysler vehicles, for those interested in buying them.

Few did.

Fast forward a few years and the government made it clear it would be requiring the car companies to make air bags – or “supplemental restraints,” in the always-mewly language of government force – standard in the vehicles they made. The car companies fought the government; explained – well, they tried to explain – that air bags were expensive and that they might (as they did) hurt and even kill children, older people and so on.

They were overruled.

It was the last time the car companies tried to oppose the government.

Ever since then (and this was back in the ’90s) the car industry has become more-and-more like the industries of the old Soviet Union, now in the process of reincarnating itself in the West. Meaning, they have become adjuncts of the government, not merely doing as they’re told grudgingly and even sometimes trying to get away with not doing as they’re told, but aggressively doing more than the government tells them they must do at the moment.

Such as make “advanced technologies” like speed limit “assistance” and lane-keep “assistance” and braking “assistance” systems standard in vehicles years before anyone had heard of a federal fatwa requiring such “technology” be made standard equipment.

The car industry having decided what buyers want no longer matters.

What matters is being in good with the government. What matters is fervid amen’ing of the narrative.

One sees this, also, in what pretends to be the automotive press, which always praises the latest “advances” – much the same as the general press always sung the praises of the mRNA drugs being pushed as “vaccines.”

Just like the journalists of Pravda, all those years ago.

And here we are, again.

As an Amazon Associate I Earn from Qualifying Purchases
-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
March 3, 2024 12:48 pm

Airbags in the early 70s?

whognu
whognu
  Anonymous
March 3, 2024 1:07 pm

“In 1971, the Ford Motor Company built an experimental airbag fleet. General Motors installed airbags in a fleet of 1973 Chevrolet Impalas—for government use only. The 1973 Oldsmobile Toronado was the first car with a passenger airbag sold to the public. General Motors later offered an option of driver-side airbags in full-sized Oldsmobiles and Buicks in 1975 and 1976, respectively. Cadillacs became available with driver and passenger airbags options during those years as well. General Motors, which had marketed its airbags as the “Air Cushion Restraint System,” discontinued the ACRS option for the 1977 model year, citing a lack of consumer interest.”

https://www.thoughtco.com/history-of-airbags-1991232

kfg
kfg
March 3, 2024 12:52 pm

All I really need right now is a 250cc buckboard.

Russ
Russ
March 3, 2024 2:20 pm

I will not buy a pickup called the HAL 2030. No way. C10 or F150 or Ram 1500 work just fine without the AI.

Ed
Ed
  Russ
March 4, 2024 9:20 am

Yep, Russ. I like my ’68 F250 Camper Special. I broke down and bought a new truck in ’20, a ’92 GMC Sierra which has a few “improvements” that I don’t like, but they are all easily bypassed. I’m keeping my current fleet of two pickups for the foreseeable future.

Anthony Aaron
Anthony Aaron
March 3, 2024 8:28 pm

It’s funny — both Safari and Firefox refuse to open the Eric Peters web site … or to open the bulk of the images in the TBF web page of his article … saying something’s up with his website’s being wrong and not being what it purports to be.

From Firefox:

Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead

Firefox detected an issue and did not continue to http://www.ericpetersautos.com. The website is either misconfigured or your computer clock is set to the wrong time.

It’s likely the website’s certificate is expired, which prevents Firefox from connecting securely. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.

What can you do about it?

Safari says that the link to his own site may be to someone impersonating his site … trying to get at my personal and banking information.

Mmmm … is Eric Peters being censored for maybe being ahead of the curve here?

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Anthony Aaron
March 3, 2024 11:18 pm

It’s almost like they’re mocking us! Consider the topic of the article!
This browser warning, and things like it, are starting to happen to a number of sites I visit. I’m ready to look for a browser that ignores any “security risks” – just like I’m thinking I’ll need to figure out ways that to get around the “security risks” in cars that prevent me from driving them. Any one have suggestions for such a browser? Something that can display modern sites, yet let’s ME be in control of whether I get to see the content or not?

Anthony Aaron
Anthony Aaron
  Anonymous
March 4, 2024 12:11 am

As I mentioned, Firefox for Mac OS didn’t pass this test … nor did Tor browser, which is based on Firefox. Personally, I avoid any and all browsers based on chrome or any derivative thereof … just don’t trust gargle … same with any MSFT based browsers …

We’re being boxed in — I don’t even trust AAPL that much anymore — and I’ve been using their computers and software since 1995 … the last Mac OS that I really liked was 9.2.2 … AAPL wasn’t censoring its user, nor was it ‘protecting’ us from anything via the numerous ‘security’ upgrades and updates.

ADDENDUM: I just went to the Eric Peters website by typing the URL into the browser window … and it warned me, in greater detail than earlier today, that the Peters website’s security certificate had expired just yesterday. I was still able to choose to visit the site — which I did — and all worked well.

Home

The Central Scrutinizer
The Central Scrutinizer
  Anthony Aaron
March 4, 2024 10:42 am

I call bullshit. I just opened the site in Firefox with no problems whatsoever. The real problem is that you THINK you know what’s going on…and ya don’t.

Kennyboy
Kennyboy
March 4, 2024 8:10 am

HOW ABOUT NOT “ALLOWING THEM” IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE “POWER CORRUPTS…ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY”?
A “SOVEREIGN BEING (HUMAN BEING) NEVER NEEDED IT…”ALL WE NEED IS LOVE” TO STAY AS “ONE”
LISTEN THE TEXT OF THAT BEATLE’S SONG: “IMAGINE” BY JOHN LENNON

Kennyboy
Kennyboy
  Kennyboy
March 4, 2024 8:16 am

ALSO, FOLKS…HOW DO YOU LOVE SOMEONE WHO IS TRYING TO “KILL YOU” IN MASS “GENOCIDE”???

VOWG
VOWG
March 4, 2024 8:30 am

My 1954 Ford had none of the s**t on it and ran just fine for few hundred thousand miles, and most things could be repaired or replaced in the driveway.

The Central Scrutinizer
The Central Scrutinizer
  VOWG
March 4, 2024 10:43 am

Settin’ point gaps with a matchbook cover. Those were the days!