China is banning automakers from using the terms "smart driving" and "autonomous driving" when they advertise driving assistance features, and will tighten rules around such technology upgrades, the government told industry representatives, according to a transcript of a meeting.
The move follows a fatal accident involving Xiaomi's best-selling SU7 sedan in March that triggered widespread concerns over vehicle safety.
Under the updated rule, automakers are no longer allowed to test and improve their ADAS via remote software updates for vehicles already delivered to customers without approval, according to the meeting transcript.
They are now required to carry out sufficient tests to verify reliability and to obtain approval from the authorities before such roll-outs.
Dangit China I hate your murderous regime but sometimes autocracy can do things that make sense and roll it out immediately without being blocked by market lobbists. It makes so much sense that...
Dangit China I hate your murderous regime but sometimes autocracy can do things that make sense and roll it out immediately without being blocked by market lobbists.
It makes so much sense that companies shouldn't be allowed to use live human beings as A B safety testers.
I sometimes think about how the argument against benevolent dictatorship or autocracy is: what if you get bad leaders? Then you're SOL. But the flip side for democracy is: what if you have a...
I sometimes think about how the argument against benevolent dictatorship or autocracy is: what if you get bad leaders? Then you're SOL.
But the flip side for democracy is: what if you have a stupid, gullible, and/or apathetic electorate? It turns out that an open society with an anti-intellectual culture is very easy to manipulate by state and corporate actors.
The argument is "then they hopefully go through 10-20ish years of misery and then actually get to vote them out" vs the dictatorship/autocracy solution of "hope they die in a way that things...
But the flip side for democracy is: what if you have a stupid, gullible, and/or apathetic electorate? It turns out that an open society with an anti-intellectual culture is very easy to manipulate by state and corporate actors.
The argument is "then they hopefully go through 10-20ish years of misery and then actually get to vote them out" vs the dictatorship/autocracy solution of "hope they die in a way that things change for the better or violent revolution".
Obviously yes, any form of government, democracy included, can fall INTO dictatorship, or it could just actually be a fools democracy, and god knows many of the modern democracies fall somewhere on that specturm, but it isn't the first time, and they've recovered before.
Good for them, I wish we would do that in America. Also wish we'd ban advertisements across the board but that probably won't happen in the near future
Good for them, I wish we would do that in America. Also wish we'd ban advertisements across the board but that probably won't happen in the near future
Doesn't even have to be a blanket advertising ban, though I would support that. Instead, just allow any consumer to independently sue any company for damages or some form of libel if an...
Doesn't even have to be a blanket advertising ban, though I would support that.
Instead, just allow any consumer to independently sue any company for damages or some form of libel if an advertisement contains a verifiably false statement. 'America's largest 5G network', eh? Might want to check the receipts on that one. With that kind of bounty system, I suspect so much of our (false, brainwashing) advertising would disappear entirely.
Alternatively, the government could create strict rules for advertising. Bright yellow background, black Courier font, no art, only cited and verified facts. Create the AA (Advertising Administration, similar to drug approvals from the FDA) and force every ad to get an ID number that must be displayed in the bottom right of the ad. No ID means no approval means massive fines, and since you're advertising your own product, it's easy to tell who made the ad. Massive fines if you put up a false illegal ad for someone else's product.
I really wish someone would try some new ideas in this space.
That could be an approach worth exploring. However, I think the biggest issue with ads is the unconsented theft of attention. My preferred approach is to outlaw unsolicited advertisement. You...
That could be an approach worth exploring. However, I think the biggest issue with ads is the unconsented theft of attention. My preferred approach is to outlaw unsolicited advertisement. You can't have billboards or any ads in public places. You can't put ads in the middle of a video or an online article. However, you can absolutely have a video or article that praises a product, even a paid-for one. Ads can say whatever they want as long as the reader actively sought them out and is free to turn them off or walk away without losing access to anything else.
You’d probably just get more ads with the far legalspeak that goes with medication ads. I really wish those would go away entirely, I don’t need to hear about a new a diseases and medicine for it...
You’d probably just get more ads with the far legalspeak that goes with medication ads. I really wish those would go away entirely, I don’t need to hear about a new a diseases and medicine for it while watching TV.
Makes me wonder how all the Tesla drivers who spent another $10,000 on "Full Self Driving" feel a decade later when they realize the reality STILL doesnt live up to the fantasy.
Makes me wonder how all the Tesla drivers who spent another $10,000 on "Full Self Driving" feel a decade later when they realize the reality STILL doesnt live up to the fantasy.
Most I know seem happy, except for the patch that 'made things worse'. Blows my mind on several levels, but they basically don't pay attention when driving and are happy to be able to do so. I...
Most I know seem happy, except for the patch that 'made things worse'. Blows my mind on several levels, but they basically don't pay attention when driving and are happy to be able to do so. I personally think it's an accident waiting to happen, but so it goes.
Dangit China I hate your murderous regime but sometimes autocracy can do things that make sense and roll it out immediately without being blocked by market lobbists.
It makes so much sense that companies shouldn't be allowed to use live human beings as A B safety testers.
I sometimes think about how the argument against benevolent dictatorship or autocracy is: what if you get bad leaders? Then you're SOL.
But the flip side for democracy is: what if you have a stupid, gullible, and/or apathetic electorate? It turns out that an open society with an anti-intellectual culture is very easy to manipulate by state and corporate actors.
That's why a healthy democracy invests in education and a modern one needs to take cyber warfare (fake news) seriously.
The argument is "then they hopefully go through 10-20ish years of misery and then actually get to vote them out" vs the dictatorship/autocracy solution of "hope they die in a way that things change for the better or violent revolution".
Obviously yes, any form of government, democracy included, can fall INTO dictatorship, or it could just actually be a fools democracy, and god knows many of the modern democracies fall somewhere on that specturm, but it isn't the first time, and they've recovered before.
Good for them, I wish we would do that in America. Also wish we'd ban advertisements across the board but that probably won't happen in the near future
Doesn't even have to be a blanket advertising ban, though I would support that.
Instead, just allow any consumer to independently sue any company for damages or some form of libel if an advertisement contains a verifiably false statement. 'America's largest 5G network', eh? Might want to check the receipts on that one. With that kind of bounty system, I suspect so much of our (false, brainwashing) advertising would disappear entirely.
Alternatively, the government could create strict rules for advertising. Bright yellow background, black Courier font, no art, only cited and verified facts. Create the AA (Advertising Administration, similar to drug approvals from the FDA) and force every ad to get an ID number that must be displayed in the bottom right of the ad. No ID means no approval means massive fines, and since you're advertising your own product, it's easy to tell who made the ad. Massive fines if you put up a false illegal ad for someone else's product.
I really wish someone would try some new ideas in this space.
That could be an approach worth exploring. However, I think the biggest issue with ads is the unconsented theft of attention. My preferred approach is to outlaw unsolicited advertisement. You can't have billboards or any ads in public places. You can't put ads in the middle of a video or an online article. However, you can absolutely have a video or article that praises a product, even a paid-for one. Ads can say whatever they want as long as the reader actively sought them out and is free to turn them off or walk away without losing access to anything else.
You’d probably just get more ads with the far legalspeak that goes with medication ads. I really wish those would go away entirely, I don’t need to hear about a new a diseases and medicine for it while watching TV.
Makes me wonder how all the Tesla drivers who spent another $10,000 on "Full Self Driving" feel a decade later when they realize the reality STILL doesnt live up to the fantasy.
Most I know seem happy, except for the patch that 'made things worse'. Blows my mind on several levels, but they basically don't pay attention when driving and are happy to be able to do so. I personally think it's an accident waiting to happen, but so it goes.
A decade later? The early adopters don’t keep anything that long.
Mirror: https://archive.ph/44axe