You must log in or register to comment.
Rear view cameras have been required by law for a few years now. I’m pretty sure it was a ploy by manufacturers to get a screen on every dashboard so they could sell ads.
The manufacturers were opposed to them being required. I think they claimed it would cost an extra $200-250 per car. But they sure won’t pass up on the ads if they think they can get away with it!
I also hate ads, but I think it was more likely to minimize how many children old people were squashing :
Negative. They were very against the law. A guy backed over and killed his own child and made it a multi year mission to force back up cameras as a requirement. Politicians look bad if they don’t want to “save the children.”
Peak lemming take
They’re not wrong? It’s an open secret in the business world that information is the new gold.
If something is free, you’re the product.
They are wrong. The manufacturers could have put and marketed a large screen display in their cars without needing to hide behind backup cameras as an excuse.
Plus, the auto companies lobbied against being forced to install backup cameras by default.
I’ve never seen an ad on my car’s screen. My brother’s car from 2013 has a backup camera, and that car literally cannot communicate to any server that could serve ads.
If car companies wanted to put ads on screens, they wouldn’t need an excuse to put in a screen, they’d just do it. But they wouldn’t do that, because ads are a safety hazard and they’d have their pants sued off. I can’t even connect a new Bluetooth device to my car (pressing 1 button) unless the parking brake is applied. Stellantis is in hot water for their braindead attempt at “ads” in their cars, and that’s just a pop-up that shows up when the car is stopped.
Not even Google maps advertises to me when I use Android Auto, and ads are Google’s thing
Law where??? I still see junker cars from the 60s driving around here where I live.
For new car sales.
us transportation made it a law in 2014 but effective 2018 that all vehicles made after 2018 under 10000 pounds are required to have a backup screen. so any new car made in the reletive past decade will probably have one. laws for cars are not retroactive usually.
Just curious if you’re aware of any laws for cars that ARE/HAVE BEEN retroactive?
Just generically I can’t really think of anything that “could be”, but I’m no mechanic or lawyer. 🤣
off the top of my head, no. but I know for the seatbelt law at least, if a car before the mandatory seatbelt law had optional seatbelts, having the seatbelt became mandatory if it had one (that is, you cannot remove them). Cars that had no seatbelts nor had optional ones are exempt.
Maybe around car alarms?
The after market ones are awful, but car theft in the early 2000s was also way higher (like 2x) than anything we’ve seen since.
Portland? Haha
This is a conspiracy theory as nuts as fake moon landings
They’re the manufacturers. They could just… Put a screen in anyway?
Consumers definitely want the cameras regardless of legislation. It’s one of the very few decent features added to cars recently.
Right? I’m driving my mom’s old Element to try to sell it, and it feels so unsafe to back up without the camera.
Looking around does nothing when you’re sandwiched between two massive trucks.
People in their big SUVs were running over their kids in the driveway so a Mazda miata has a camera now. Similar to people in their Ford exploders that were rolling over because they didn’t check their tire pressures and the negligence of Firestone causing tires to seperate, so they now have tpms sensors.
Yo fuck those sensors tho. My old ass car has em and they started all dying from age, fuckers want 90 bucks each plus whatever bullshit amount for labor to replace them, so now I gotta click past a stupid warning whenever I start my car to see the digital speedometer 🙄
Dealer pricing?
IDK, I looked around online and the ones I need cost about what they were saying wherever I looked. Even if it was $50 each tho it’s too much, imo, just to get rid of a minor annoyance.
Would this work as depicted? Wouldn’t it just be a blur?
Maybe there’s a specific size/resolution of image you could use to make it work, if you knew the exact distance? But I’d also think this wouldn’t work…
Taping to the camera as shown on the left would be challenging to make work at least. The cameras don’t put out light so whatever image you use would have to be on paper thin and light enough for backlighting to work. The distortion that close would also be extreme, so you’d want to keep the main part of your image in the center and small. And yeah, it’d probably be blurry, but the resolution on most of those cameras was already pretty bad up until a few years ago so you might not notice.
It’s not just (or so much) the resolution, it’s what the minimum focus distance of the lens is. I’d bet that is going to be more than a couple of cm
Mine likes to proudly announce “Connected to Bluetooth device!” while I’m in the middle of a manouevre.
I’m reading this in Ralph Wiggum’s voice, like the car version of “my cats breath smells like cat food!”.
Are rear view cameras really “fancy” these days?
It means your car is likely less than 10 years old, so… yes.
Not at all. They have been required since 2018 and fairly cheap to add to older vehicles.
2018!! Well shit. Did they even make cars that backed up prior to then?
Idk… This could backfire and scare them into punching the accelerator in reverse, causing more damage out of fear!
It would be fun to figure out how to place a lens on it … to either bring the image closer or make it further to completely screw with the perspective
Or even a fun house mirror effect and distort the image in the center.
It would cause them to have a few accidents before realizing something was wrong with the camera
Why tf would you make them more of a danger
Didn’t stop to think this could harm pedestrians, did ya?
