[jchw]

The inability of the car to safely enforce this is probably the main reason why this works this way. The responsibility is split, though: cars are required to be designed in ways that discourage or prohibit some unsafe behaviors entirely. Not too different from services requiring 2FA: doesn't mean the TOTP secret is necessarily stored safely.

[ImPostingOnHN]

A friend of mine rented a larger, newer Jeep SUV when in town. It would not go into gear unless seatbelts were buckled. It was awful - not a future I want to live in. I'd rather have the choice than have it made for me in the name of safety.

> Not too different from services requiring 2FA

That is another practice I find awful for the above reason.

[serf]

Another underlying problem with that kind of gatekeeping are the dangerous scenarios that can happen when the Jeep decides erroneously not to start due to a sensor anomaly.

It's a virtue that a car continues to operate when all the warning signs and buzzers are going off; this means that the human in charge is left in ultimate control of the situation and there doesn't need to be any complex umbrella structuring of liability -- this allows a driver to safely drive away from a dangerous tidal wave/assault/lava flow/whatever even if their seat belt sensor is broken ; this is very important for numerous reasons.

[dizhn]

There are cars from the 90s that put the seat belt on automatically when you close the door. It looks awful but it works.