• @bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8111 months ago

    Remember that the auto industry was so resistant to putting speed governors in cars 100 years ago that they invented the term Jaywalking as a way of blaming the victims of their manslaughter.

  • Rentlar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4111 months ago

    The one rule I would dream of seeing is soft speed throttling to ensure that cars and trucks stay a safe 3 second distance or more apart from each other. That should be relatively easy to do with basic distance sensing and calculations.

    • @Moneo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2211 months ago

      Fucking tailgaters. No idea why so few people seem to be aware of how dangerous and stupid it is to tailgate.

      • Clay_pidgin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1311 months ago

        No, No. You don’t understand. They are great drivers, an accident won’t happen to THEM!

      • @stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 months ago

        They do understand but think that they are playing the statistics. “It can’t happen to me” is the mantra of many drivers.

      • @Classy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        Don’t you fucking understand, I HAVE to get to the liquor store 0.38 seconds faster or I’m going to start getting withdrawals!

    • @dankm@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      611 months ago

      It is relatively easy. My 2019 Mazda3 does this already when cruise control is on. Its front manufacturer logo is a radar device, and there are a few more on the car. Making it full-time should be easy enough.

  • @MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4111 months ago

    That means it’s the right call to make. Whatever auto industry is complaining about the opposite is beneficial to consumer.

  • @MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3211 months ago

    So they want self driving cars, which do not brake for pedestrians and cyclists? Do I understand this correctly?

    • @MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They want dystopia. Ideally you should pay per door handle use. Pay by kilometer and horn sounds are extra DLC. If possible, you’d keep paying and wouldn’t be allowed to change manufacturer and car for number of years so they don’t have to be as competitive and innovative. If possible government should mandate each human should have at least one car.

      Well, since most of it sounds stupid and exploitative, they take what they can. Rent a heated seat, extra for autopilot and other gadgets, etc. The rest they lobby like crazy pushing against EV, pushing against different zoning laws other than suburban sprawl. Etc. Hyperloop anyone?

    • @dillekant@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      011 months ago

      I think it’s worth thinking about this in a technical sense, not just in a political or capitalist sense: Yes, car companies want self driving cars, but self driving cars are immensely dangerous, and there’s no evidence that self driving cars will make roads safer. As such, legislation should be pushing very hard to stop self driving cars.

      Also, the same technology used for self driving is used for AEB. This actually makes self-driving more likely, in that the car companies have to pay for all that equipment anyway, they may as well try and shoehorn in self driving. On top of this, I have no confidence that the odds of an error in the system (eg: a dirty sensor, software getting confused) is not higher than the odds of a system correctly braking when it needs to.

      This means someone can get into a situation where they are:

      • in a car, on a road, nothing of interest in front of them
      • the software determines that there is an imminent crash
      • Car brakes hard (even at 90mph), perhaps losing traction depending on road conditions
      • may be hit from behind or may hit an object
      • Driver is liable even though they never actually pressed the brakes.

      This is unacceptable on its face. Yes, cars are dangerous, yes we need to make them safer, but we should use better policies like slower speeds, safer roads, and transitioning to smaller lighter weight cars, not this AI automation bullshit.

      • @Hagdos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        but self driving cars are immensely dangerous, and there’s no evidence that self driving cars will make roads safer.

        This is a horrible take, and absolutely not true. Maybe for the current state of technology, but not as an always-true statement.

        Humans are horrible at driving. It’s not hard to be better at driving than the average human. Perfect doesn’t exist, and computer-driven cars will always make some mistakes, but so do humans (and media will report on self-driving cars much more than on the thousands of vehicle deaths caused by human error). AEB and other technologies have already made cars much safer over the previous decades.

        On top of this, I have no confidence that the odds of an error in the system (eg: a dirty sensor, software getting confused) is not higher than the odds of a system correctly braking when it needs to.

        Tell me you’ve never used or tested AEB without telling me.

        Dirty sensors trigger a “dirty sensor warning”, not a full emergency brake. There’s more than one sensor, and it doesn’t emergency brake on one bad sensor reading. Again, perfect doesn’t exist, but it isn’t close to the 50/50 you’re trying to portray here.

        • Car brakes hard (even at 90mph), perhaps losing traction depending on road conditions

        Any car with AEB will also have ABS and traction control, so losing traction is unlikely. Being rear-ended is never on the liability of the front car.

        Yes, cars are dangerous, yes we need to make them safer, but we should use better policies like slower speeds, safer roads, and transitioning to smaller lighter weight cars,

        Absolutely agree on all of this. Slower speeds and safer roads make accidents less likely and less lethal, for human and computer drivers both.

        As such, legislation should be pushing very hard to stop self driving cars.

        Legislation should push hard for setting clear boundaries on when self-driving is good enough to be allowed on the road, and where the legal responsibilities are in case of problems. Just completely stopping it would be wasted potential for safer roads for everyone in the long run.

        • @dillekant@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          011 months ago

          There’s no evidence that self driving can be better. It’s purely faith.

          Drivers are not horrible, rather horrible drivers can get a license. Treating cars as a right makes that worse. Self driving makes that worse.

      • @Clent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        Under what circumstances does being hit from behind result in liability to the lead vehicle. It’s the responsibility of the vehicle behind you to keep appropriate distance. This sounds like you’re regurgitating their talking points like a bot.

        • @dillekant@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          I conflated two points. Driver hits something due to sudden braking = they are liable.

          Driver hit from behind at high speed = dangerous for occupants. Either way no one asked the driver.

  • Daniel Quinn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1811 months ago

    These rules are convoluted and near impossible to apply. Specific braking speeds for some objects compared to others? That requires reliable computer vision, which hasn’t been demonstrated anywhere yet.

    And those speeds? 92mph is 148kph! Why the fuck are cars even permitted to be capable of that when no road in the country allows it? And why would you want to introduce unpredictable braking scenarios at such speeds?

    What is feasible is a speed limiter based on the posted limit, but that’d be too practical.

    • @nogooduser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1311 months ago

      What is feasible is a speed limiter based on the posted limit, but that’d be too practical.

      I have recently got a car that tells me the currently posted limit and it is frequently wrong. It misses sign posts and sometimes thinks that a signpost for a side road applies to you.

      It also has a speed limiter and a button to set the limit to the detected speed which I use a lot but I wouldn’t want it to do it itself.

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        Okay but we can still run a max speed governor. Put it at 78, with that annoying beeping sound if you creep above 75.

    • @phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      911 months ago

      Thing is like none of our roads are properly tested for the posted speed limits. Interstates can often go up to a 75 limit and regular traffic will go at 85 (because cops dont care til more than 10 over and that difference adds up on long trips) with some people going 90+.

    • @dankm@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months ago

      The highest speed limit in the USA is 137kph or 85mph. 148 is not a lot higher, and people tend to be stupid.

  • @DrCake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1511 months ago

    I haven’t read up on the new law but the EU already mandates that all new vehicles are required to have “advanced emergency braking”.

    I wonder how different that actually is from the US law, or are the car manufactures making a fuss over something they are already doing somewhere else.

  • @breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -3
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    If the car is now expected to do the braking for me, does that mean I can floor it everywhere, knowing the car is supposed to brake automatically when detecting collisions etc. If it fails, who is liable? Driver, or faulty software?

    “The car has AEB and it failed to detect the person in the road. The car and braking system failed so I am entirely not liable. Go sue ford instead”

  • @Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -611 months ago

    That does seem really dangerous, in terms of people who aren’t expecting a he cars they’re to stop. Or then our expecting their cars to stop and their cars don’t stop. And how bad we know Teslas are at stopping.

    On the other hand, if it is implemented, people will be driving super carefully.

    adding this kind of a feature seems like it’ll make cars more difficult to drive, and people are already so bad at driving.

    • @DrCake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      611 months ago

      This is an emergency brake, ie it will wait until the last possible moment and brake full on. If the driver wasn’t expecting it to stop, then they weren’t paying enough attention to the road in front of them

      • @Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        What about malfunction or misidentifications?

        Errors in any machine are common, and errors in automatic driving systems are ubiquitous and constant.

        • @DrCake@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -211 months ago

          I’m no mechanic, but I’d guess there’s multiple/redundant sensors so the case where one fails is handled. It is a concern but I’ve never heard of that kind of incident happening in the years they’ve been around

          • @Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It’s very common for Teslas to drive into things, like cop cars, parked cars, people and trees and off cliffs.

            Sensors and software aren’t reliable yet for high-speed driving or auto braking.

            It might still be worth it. I’d rather have Auto sensors in every car and have them all brake all the time and maybe have people stop using cars so much because they’re irritating.

            Especially for those giant stupid American SUVs and trucks.

            I like the idea, I just I hope they focus solely on make sure the car stops instead of getting distracted so that the sensors aren’t good enough, because that’s just going to cause more accidents