[_zamorano_]

First, at least in europe, regulations won't allow carmakers to build basic cars. Cars are required to be online for an emergency call in case of accident. Plus all fancy systems like lane keeping are now compulsory.

So you can't no longer buy such cars. And in case you go for the used market, regulations will keep you away from cities due to polution issues, even for tiny cities.

[phero_cnstrcts]

Then we should also question those laws. I don’t buy the „it’s for your protection“ argument anymore.

[c0pium]

Fatalities and collisions are both down significantly in places with those kinds of laws, and there are some interesting natural experiments created by exceptions which strongly indicate those links are causal.

Just because a law has a side effect you don’t like doesn’t mean the Illuminati are out to get you.

[_zamorano_]

For many people is either I buy something I can afford, or I don't buy anything.

What is safest. Regulating new cars to expensive safety standards, and make them unaffordable for the masses or being more conservative about such standards and allow affordable cars to exist?

European govermentes have chosen the first option. In the meantime, the car average age keep increasing. Much safer, indeed.

The end goal is to have much less cars on the road, not conspiracy, but an actual statement. And of course, the cars to get rid of are not those of the wealthy.

[almostnormal]

> Cars are required to be online for an emergency call in case of accident.

No. They are not required to "be" online but just capable to connect if/when an accident occurs.

That these modules that can connect are abused to always be connected is an invention of the manufacturers.

[nottheengineer]

> Cars are required to be online for an emergency call in case of accident.

Does that mean online as in internet connection or just GSM?

[_zamorano_]

GSM, AFAIK