Because all new cars will soon have (and most already have) a drowsy driver detection system. This is also sometimes marketed as a distracted driving detection system. The latter slides into synonymity with impaired driving, which has already come to be synonymous with drunk driving.
Read the full article at EricPetersAuto
Summary of “Sit Up!” by Eric Peters
Quick Overview
In the article “Sit Up!” Eric Peters critiques the increasing reliance on technology in modern vehicles, particularly focusing on drowsy and distracted driver detection systems. He argues that these technologies not only undermine driver competence but also create a more distracting and frustrating driving experience.
Key Points
- Emergence of Monitoring Technology: New cars are increasingly equipped with systems that monitor driver attention, assuming that drivers require constant oversight.
- Assumption of Incompetence: Peters contends that these systems imply that licensed drivers are not capable of safely operating their vehicles without technological assistance.
- Distraction from Driving: The intrusive nature of these systems can lead to more distractions, counteracting their intended purpose of enhancing safety.
- Standardization of Technology: These monitoring systems are becoming standard in new vehicles, raising concerns about their implications for personal agency and driving enjoyment.
- Future of Driving: Peters suggests that the ultimate goal of such technologies may be to phase out human driving altogether, relegating drivers to mere passengers in their own vehicles.
Detailed Breakdown
Monitoring Systems in New Cars
Peters begins by highlighting the introduction of drowsy and distracted driver detection systems in new cars, which utilize eye movement monitors to assess driver attention. These systems are designed to alert drivers if they appear distracted or drowsy, akin to parental admonishments to “sit up” and pay attention.
Presumption of Driver Incompetence
A significant concern raised by Peters is the inherent assumption that drivers are incompetent. He argues that the once-respected process of obtaining a driver’s license has been diminished to a mere identification process, which now presumes that drivers need constant monitoring. He likens this to the oversight of individuals on house arrest, suggesting a loss of dignity in the driving experience.
Distraction and Over-Correction
Peters critiques the functionality of these monitoring systems, pointing out that they often misinterpret a driver’s attention. For instance, a driver scanning their environment may be penalized for not focusing solely on the road ahead, leading to unnecessary distractions from the very act of driving. He notes, “The eye monitor system… gets upset and tries to correct when the driver is paying attention – just not exclusively to what’s directly ahead.”
Standardization and Control
The article emphasizes that these technologies are not optional but are becoming standard equipment in new cars. Peters raises questions about the motivations behind this trend, suggesting that it may be an effort to encourage drivers to relinquish control of their vehicles. He warns, “It is to ‘assist’ the driver into the passenger seat,” implying a future where human driving could be obsolete.
Dystopian Implications
Peters paints a somewhat dystopian picture of the future of driving, where constant technological oversight could lead to a loss of driving autonomy. He humorously suggests that drivers may resort to simple solutions, like covering the eye monitor, to regain a sense of control, stating, “Driver’s Face Not Detected. Sit Up! silently screams the eye monitor nag.”
Notable Quotes & Data
- “All new cars will soon have (and most already have) a drowsy driver detection system.”
- “These were not just handed out to anyone who filled out a form.”
- “It is almost impossible to not be constantly corrected by these ‘assistance technologies.’”
Context & Implications
Peters’ critique reflects broader societal concerns about increasing automation and surveillance in everyday life. The push for driver monitoring systems raises questions about personal freedom, the value of human skill in driving, and the potential for overreach by automotive technology. As these systems become standard, they may redefine the relationship between drivers and their vehicles, leading to a future where driving is less about personal agency and more about compliance with technological oversight.
In conclusion, Peters calls for a reevaluation of the role of technology in driving, advocating for a return to recognizing and trusting driver competence.