4 ms·

To be fair, auto-braking isn't useful until you need it, and by that point you're about a half second away from smashing into another car so you don't have much

• txdv 11y ago
  Or just, you know, keep your distance. Although it is sometimes quite hard, my father was once going on a German Autobahn 180kmh and he didn't realize that in the front people completely stopped. My mom realized and shouted and he hit the breaks and stopped in-between cars (if there weren't enough space inbetween, he would have mildly hit the cars). But I don't think this system would have helped in this situation
  • marvin 11y ago
    Just keeping good distance isn't guaranteed to save you from other drivers. See e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X-5fKzmy38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X-5fKzmy38
    • txdv 11y ago
      Well keeping the distance certainly helps ... but not in all situations.
  • csours 11y ago
    Why don't you think it would have helped? That's the exact situations these systems are designed for...
• dominotw 11y ago
  >That feature alone could reduce total crashes by 10% [1] Well, ofcourse. I am talking about ppl become less safety conscious because these features give them (false) sense of security. eg: Anti-Tsunami walls killed more people than they saved during great japanese tsunami because they gave people false sense of security and ppl didn't take evacuation warnings seriously assuming walls would take care of it. And ofcourse studies proved that having Tsunami walls is safer than no walls.
  • Someone1234 11y ago
    > eg: Anti-Tsunami walls killed more people than they saved during great japanese tsunami [..] And ofcourse studies proved that having Tsunami walls is safer than no walls. Huh? So walls killed more people than they saved but studies showed that they are safer with the walls..? I googled this, cannot find any information that the anti-Tsunami walls caused more people to be killed.
    • dominotw 11y ago
      >Huh? So walls killed more people than they saved but studies showed that they are safer with the walls..? Studies was done with average tsunami heights from previous tsunamis. 2011 was magnitudes higher than previous ones, walls were no match for the tsunami. >I googled this, cannot find any information that the anti-Tsunami walls caused more people to be killed. I remember seeing this in a documentary, where they were interiviewing poeople whose famalies died becuase they thought walls are going to save them. I googled it now, this was the first result http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/22/japan-to-build-massive-sea-wall-to-combat-tsunami-threat.html http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/22/japan-to-build-massi... 'The paradox of such projects, experts say, is that while they may reduce some damage, they can foster complacency. That can be a grave risk along coastlines vulnerable to tsunamis, storm surges and other natural disasters. At least some of the 18,500 people who died or went missing in the 2011 disasters failed to heed warnings to escape in time.'
  • snowwrestler 11y ago
    This is not a new argument for car safety features. The same things were said about seat belts, 3-point harnesses, and air bags. In each case, they were wrong. Accident survival rates went up significantly, while overall accident rates did not.
    • dominotw 11y ago
      >The same things were said about seat belts, 3-point harnesses, and air bags. I think this is different. Putting on seat belts doesn't make you think that you'd be saved from crash while you text.