I still don't understand the entire premise here. Who cares if a driver can deliberately defeat these things? That's not the threat model!<p>A driver nag is an attentiveness reminder. You're driving a car. You're expected to be paying attention. No one else is responsible for safety. So the car wants (for both safety and liability reasons) to make sure you're doing what you're supposed to do. And it works. The car nags me and I tug the wheel to prove I'm there. Most of the time I'm paying attention anyway, but sometimes it's because I got distracted. It works.<p>If a driver <i>deliberately</i> wants to behave unsafely, there's no way to stop that, because there's an infinite number of ways drivers can behave unsafely. Do we want a system to detect when drivers speed up on yellow? Tesla could absolutely implement that. Why aren't we demanding it? Prevent drivers from approaching cars in adjacent lanes with higher than a 30mph speed delta? Could do that too.
Prevent accelerating in the wrong direction on a road?
Possible.<p>But no, all that stuff would be dumb, because it doesn't correspond to an actual safety problem with the hardware. We recognize it's driver behavior at fault, and we don't want our cars regulating behavior.<p>Why is this different?<p>I submit it's different because "Actually Elon Musk is an Asshole and TSLA went to the moon". Which isn't a very good premise for automobile safety designs.