I was curious, in case anybody else doesn’t know who Dirk Hohndel is:

• Currently works as Head of the Open Source Program Office at Verizon
• Formerly VMware’s Chief Open Source Officer
• Formerly spent almost 15 years as Intel’s Chief Linux and Open Source Technologist
• Formerly Chief Technology Officer of SuSE and Unix Architect of Deutsche Bank
• Developer and contributor in Linux and open source since the early 1990s. He was one of the early Linux kernel developers and has contributed to several dozen open source projects over the years.

Source 1 Source 2

This is the advice people (with iOS) should follow, not disabling biometrics altogether. Using FaceID or TouchID prevents shoulder surfing to find out what the password to your phone is. When local passwords have so much control over a device, using biometrics to prevent anyone from seeing what your passcode is is very useful.

I don’t think it’s as black / white when it comes to implementation as you suggest. Let me know if you know more, but it seems from my uninformed opinion that if the state laws don’t follow the federal law, state agencies don’t need to enforce.

Turn state / federal law around for something a bit better to think about. Looking at cannabis legalization, many states have legalized it, though it’s still illegal federally. As you state and listed in the Wikipedia article, the states choose not to have their police agencies enforce the federal law. But federal law enforcement could come in and enforce it (they just have chosen not to).

I think it’s a safe assumption that will work in the same way here? Maybe the federal government will choose to enforce their law over the states here? Not sure, but just my take. Not trying to defend this, I just wanted to call out and question how state law differences from federal don’t seem in practice to make much of a difference.

But it’s more likely in a car where the drivers may have been mislead into believing a myth that the car will drive itself safely without them.

I’d wager the driver knew full well that the car does not drive without them. While it is a very poorly and marketing influenced name (“Autopilot”); unless this was the drivers first time using it, and had only used it for 5 seconds before the accident they new perfectly well what the feature was.

You have to try to game the car for it to allow you to take your hands off the wheel. It’s pretty sensitive to movements and if your hands are off the wheel you get visible and audible alerts before the car disengages the cruise control / lane assistance.

This seems like a case of a reckless driver who killed someone and is attempting to push blame or form some excuse for their negligence. The driver not paying attention to the road is the danger here, no matter what car they’re driving.

It’s poorly named. A more accurate, less marketing influenced name would be “Adaptive Cruise Control with Lane Assist” for the basic “Autopilot”.