8 ms·

The Fight for the Right to Drive

20 points by somebehemoth 7y ago

resoluteteeth 7y ago
It is way too early to worry about manually driving a car becoming illegal. For that to even be a possibility, self-driving cars will have to be perfected and then become completely ubiquitous. If that happens, I think it should be up to the society that exists at that point to decide whether manual driving should be banned (for example if self-driving cars are much safer by then). Requiring cars to have wheels is also premature, because there are currently no cars that are safe to operate purely in self-driving mode with no backup driver, but once (if) there are fully self driving cars, people who can't manually drive will probably want to buy them. At this point, it initially may be necessary to at least disable the manually driving functionality in this case, if not outright remove the steering wheel, for safety (e.g when the car is being operated by children, people without licenses, seniors, etc.) and once this is possible it would be somewhat absurd for manual car aficionados to argue that simply making cars available in these configurations is somehow restricting people's freedoms. Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available, and in the long term removing the manual controls will probably provide more room for making self-driving cars more comfortable (making the seats recline like beds with a suitable safety harness, etc.).
- hitpointdrew 7y ago
  >Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available I guess I am the 1%, then. Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. I support the goals of the Human Driving Association. I also disagree that it is too early, as many people already see it as inevitable that self-driving will be illegal.
  - msla 7y ago
    OK, what happens when a member of the Human Driving Association impacts a member of the I'm A Goddamned Pedestrian Stop Fucking Killing Me Association? My idea is simple: If, in an era when self-driving cars are the norm, you choose to drive and you hit someone, that's it. It's First Degree/Premeditated Homicide if you killed them, or the highest possible degree of Aggravated Assault if you didn't. You did something deliberately contrary to the norm, which was significantly more dangerous to everyone else, and, as a direct result, you caused them death or permanent damage. You can't rely on the excuse of needing to drive yourself, as you can now, so the penalties go up proportionately.
    - xur17 7y ago
      I feel like the penalty should be similar to the penalty given for accidentally shooting someone with a firearm when hunting and killing them. Any idea what the penalty is for that?
      - msla 7y ago
        https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-criminal-penalties-for-accidentally-shooting-someone.html https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-crimi... > When a person unintentionally kills another, whether or not a gun was used, they can be charged with manslaughter, which is a felony. Manslaughter is frequently referred to as criminally negligent homicide, as that name more closely mirrors the elements of a manslaughter charge. To be found guilty of manslaughter, a person has to die as a result of a defendant's inherently dangerous actions or actions taken with reckless disregard. > Typical penalties for a manslaughter conviction include at least one year in jail, and can be much worse if the conduct that led to the death merit such. For example, a repeat drunk driver that causes a death is likely to face a harsher sentence than a recently victimized elderly man who, instinctively, accidentally shoots someone they believe to be a robber. And I say the penalties should be worse because cars would be less obviously dangerous than guns in an era when most cars are self-driving. In short, a gun is a gun, and people know what guns are. If someone is waving a firearm around, well, most people who have competent faculties know that that's dangerous. In the era I'm foreseeing, which I think is the era most of us in this thread are foreseeing, a car is no longer as inherently dangerous as they are now, unless someone has made the conscious choice to make it that dangerous again by driving it manually. I also support greatly increased penalties for DUI, but that's going a bit afield.
  - naravara 7y ago
    >Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. Why not just take a walk?
    - romwell 7y ago
      > I really like X and want to keep doing it >> When not do something entirely different altogether? Gotta love HN. For the sake of being Captain Obvious: people who like moving at fast speeds probably won't get the same enjoyment out of moving at slow speeds. As far as clearing the head goes, I heard from many people that they get into a kind of flow state while their hands have something to do while experiencing the effect of this activity. For some, it's playing the piano, listening to the sound, and getting lost in the thought. For others, it's operating a vehicle and seeing the lights whiz by. Different strokes for different folks, you know.
    - hitpointdrew 7y ago
      That is like saying "Hey I know you really love playing Tennis. That you enjoy the game, and how you feel when you play, and after the match. But we are going to outlaw Tennis, why don't you just go play Basketball instead? Mmmkay?"
      - hannasanarion 7y ago
        How many people are killed every year by inattentive or incompetent tennis players who think they're hot stuff?
        hitpointdrew 7y ago
        If John Mcenroe comes out of retirement, it could be a lot.
        charliesharding 7y ago
        Would you want alcohol to be banned because it causes harm as well? It's about losing personal liberty - people will dig in their heels.
  - reidjs 7y ago
    Then go to a regulated track and drive to your heart's content? I don't like the idea of people just 'clearing their heads' while driving a 2 ton box at 65 miles per hour.
    - hitpointdrew 7y ago
      >go to a regulated track and drive Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 car, but now 2 cars, a trailer to legally transport the manual car. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say driving around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
      - icebraining 7y ago
        Not "getting" driving for enjoyment is not the same as stupidity, and you (the supporters of the association's goals) will have to convince a lot of people who don't get it. This is not a good approach.
      - hannasanarion 7y ago
        > Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 carriage, but now a motorcar and a trailer to legally transport the horses and carriage. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say galloping around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
        hitpointdrew 7y ago
        Did you have point?
        hannasanarion 7y ago
        Yeah. Horses aren't extinct, and neither are horse enthusiasts.
        CompanionCuuube 7y ago
  - resoluteteeth 7y ago
    If we reach a point where manual driving is clearly unsafe compared to self-driving cars, do you really think that manual driving should continue to be legal simply so that you can "clear your head"? Anyway, barring a constitutional amendment, you can't pass a law now that will prevent a law banning manual driving from being passed in the future, so I think it's sort of a moot point.
  - ahartmetz 7y ago
    Or driving can just be plain fun in itself. I enjoy driving unless it's more than ~3x (there and back) per week. I mean we control machines here, right? Cars are pretty interesting machines to control. I live in a big city so I don't need a car. I got one that is fun rather than useful. Small, light, quick to accelerate and around corners. The exact opposite of an SUV (what the hell is wrong with people...).
- naravara 7y ago
  I expect you're going to see automation go a lot further in enhancing people's driving than you'll ever see robo-taxis be a viable primary mode of transporation. So it's probably not necessary to worry about human drivers being illegal, but you might see cars without key safety features become illegal the same way seatbelts and airbags are required today. So no more riding the shoulder, automated enforcement of traffic laws (so no speeding, no rolling stops, must yield at a yield sign, etc.).
- majormajor 7y ago
  Nah, this is a good time for people to be thinking about it. If you refuse to think about things that aren't 100% yet, you'll find yourself flatfooted and at a huge disadvantage to those who did. Whether you're pro- or anti-driving, the debate is going to be carried out in public for years, not just after the technology is perfected. And likewise for whatever other sort of freedom-vs-safety issues that come up with technology.
- bluGill 7y ago
  You don't need to remove the steering wheel. An autonomous car can let any idiot driver (imagine your worse case bad driver here) drive safely. Want to weave in and out of traffic: no problem, the car won't let you hit any other car or go faster than is safe for that car.
lasagnaphil 7y ago
I was planning to write a cyberpunk dystopian short story which the nation banned all non-autonomous vehicles (basically, mega-corporations like Waymo and Uber have lobbied the government and spun the media with keywords such as 'safety' and 'efficiency'). But then there is a rag-tag group of people (car enthusiasts and motorcyclers) who demand the right to driving: to feel the winds and speed flowing over their shoulders as they indulge in the absolute freedom of movement. So they occasionally drive secretly and illegally, out of the eyes of the cameras of Waymo. The story starts with a chase scene with the Google police cars, which are also 100% autonomous. The rebels have managed to fake them by camouflaging their vehicles, but the police are now using special sonar technology which augments their camera vision. (And then one of the rebels know how to hack inside the autonomous-driving deep learning system, and then yadda yadda...) But now this fucking "right to drive" thing is actually becoming a fucking reality. The future is, simply cyberpunk. Help me, I'm getting headaches.
- spaced-out 7y ago
  Would your story also include incidents where innocent people are maimed or killed in accidents caused by those "rebels" while they were "feeling the winds and speed flowing over their shoulders..."?
- 300bps 7y ago
  But now this fucking "right to drive" thing is actually becoming a fucking reality. 1.25 million people die per year from auto accidents in the world with as many as 20-50 million additional people injured or disabled. Source: https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/ https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/ The average car utilization is less than 4.5%. For over 95% of the time, most cars are just sitting there doing nothing. Source: https://www.reinventingparking.org/2013/02/cars-are-parked-95-of-time-lets-check.html https://www.reinventingparking.org/2013/02/cars-are-parked-9... Cars are the second largest expense for most people with the cost of the car, cost of maintenance, registration, insurance, parking, etc. coming only behind their residence in terms of cost. Manually driven cars are a wasteful luxury that kill over a million people per year. I can't wait until they go away.
jhbadger 7y ago
I doubt that human driving will ever be outlawed. Riding horses isn't outlawed after all. What is likely is that automated driving will be required for major highways, just like how horses are banned from them now.
- hitpointdrew 7y ago
  > Riding horses isn't outlawed after all. It is on major roads, which makes it impossible/impractical to use horse a legit mode of transportation.
  - jhbadger 7y ago
    The Amish near where I live seem to get by with their horses and carts, but they aren't taking the Interstate.
    - smacktoward 7y ago
      This would be an interesting premise for a sci-fi story: an Amish-like subculture in a far-future America, only their level of acceptable technology stopped at the early 21st century instead of the early 19th. So they drive everywhere in gas-powered cars when everyone else is teleporting, amuse themselves with movies recorded on disc when everyone else is immersed in holographic VR, talk to each other on cellphones when everyone else communicates telepathically via brain implants, etc.
    - hitpointdrew 7y ago
      Yeah, in small isolated places I am sure it can work. But try taking a horse from Quincy, MA to Washing D.C. Like John Adams did many times. If self driving doesn't become "illegal" but regulated to small isolated areas (aka "tracks"), than you might as well just make it illegal. A lot of people who like driving won't be able to afford having a self driving car, and a manual driving car, a trailer so they can transport their manual driving car legally to the track. Not to mention, most tracks are boring, mostly flat, circles and not at all the same as driving on a mountainous road.
Spartan-S63 7y ago
I don't think we need to make human driving illegal. Rather, I think we should create a financial incentive _not_ to drive. Those who want to continue to drive cars can, but at a cost. Such a cost could be assuming all liability in the event of an accident with an autonomous vehicle. Under such a model, the human driver would always be at fault.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  Or just let people drive if they like driving and hold them accountable, just like we do today. For those that don't like driving, create better options for them and let them fund it.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    How do you hold someone responsible who kills on accident? I have lost friends because some driver didn't see them in the crosswalk...
    - stronglikedan 7y ago
      Killing someone in a crosswalk goes beyond mere accident. It's negligence, likely due to impatience. Of course the driver is responsible.
      - bluGill 7y ago
        My friend is dead. The killer got 7 months in jail... I'm not okay with anyone driving - including me. I don't see any currently feasible alternatives though. (buses and trains still have drivers)
- icebraining 7y ago
  Why? If human driving is really much more dangerous, then they'll be found at fault anyway.
- herogreen 7y ago
  But if you are not careful this will increase inequality between rich and poors.
nimbius 7y ago
Speaking as an engine mechanic by trade and a python programmer for hobby, im not sure how i feel about more electronics in cars just yet. However, some of them are just objectively meaningless. -Soundaktor. this is a tiny plastic speaker mounted in the footwell of most Volkswagen cars thats designed to make fake engine noises. The idea being, if the car sounds aggressive, people will enjoy it. Ford uses these as well, and if they die they will trigger an ODB code and a trip to the dealership to fix/replace. - engine auto-off/on. This is a feature that originally showed up on Mercedes trucks to prevent drivers from idling in docks or streets. They extended it to their luxury cars, and now most high end cars to this. The idea being that if you stop at a red light, the engine shuts off to "save gas." The only thing this feature does is halve the life of your starter motor and battery.
- fh973 7y ago
  Isn't auto one-off to save a few grams of average CO2 emissions on paper to save the customer some tax money in countries where CO2 emissions are the base for taxation?
drivingmenuts 7y ago
If you take away the steering and brakes, there is no way to clear a dead car out of traffic so everyone else can get on with their lives. Take those away and your car is suddenly blocking me because the power system shit the bed, I’m gonna be considering violence very shortly.
yial 7y ago
So reading through their website... I’m not convinced that this is a real movement. Due to the layout, the prominence of the store part, etc, it really feels more like it’s a web store that has struck upon trendy marketing in the guise of fighting for the right to drive.

20 points by somebehemoth 7y ago

It is way too early to worry about manually driving a car becoming illegal. For that to even be a possibility, self-driving cars will have to be perfected and then become completely ubiquitous. If that happens, I think it should be up to the society that exists at that point to decide whether manual driving should be banned (for example if self-driving cars are much safer by then). Requiring cars to have wheels is also premature, because there are currently no cars that are safe to operate purely in self-driving mode with no backup driver, but once (if) there are fully self driving cars, people who can't manually drive will probably want to buy them. At this point, it initially may be necessary to at least disable the manually driving functionality in this case, if not outright remove the steering wheel, for safety (e.g when the car is being operated by children, people without licenses, seniors, etc.) and once this is possible it would be somewhat absurd for manual car aficionados to argue that simply making cars available in these configurations is somehow restricting people's freedoms. Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available, and in the long term removing the manual controls will probably provide more room for making self-driving cars more comfortable (making the seats recline like beds with a suitable safety harness, etc.).

hitpointdrew 7y ago
>Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available I guess I am the 1%, then. Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. I support the goals of the Human Driving Association. I also disagree that it is too early, as many people already see it as inevitable that self-driving will be illegal.
- msla 7y ago
  OK, what happens when a member of the Human Driving Association impacts a member of the I'm A Goddamned Pedestrian Stop Fucking Killing Me Association? My idea is simple: If, in an era when self-driving cars are the norm, you choose to drive and you hit someone, that's it. It's First Degree/Premeditated Homicide if you killed them, or the highest possible degree of Aggravated Assault if you didn't. You did something deliberately contrary to the norm, which was significantly more dangerous to everyone else, and, as a direct result, you caused them death or permanent damage. You can't rely on the excuse of needing to drive yourself, as you can now, so the penalties go up proportionately.
  - xur17 7y ago
    I feel like the penalty should be similar to the penalty given for accidentally shooting someone with a firearm when hunting and killing them. Any idea what the penalty is for that?
    - msla 7y ago
      https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-criminal-penalties-for-accidentally-shooting-someone.html https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-crimi... > When a person unintentionally kills another, whether or not a gun was used, they can be charged with manslaughter, which is a felony. Manslaughter is frequently referred to as criminally negligent homicide, as that name more closely mirrors the elements of a manslaughter charge. To be found guilty of manslaughter, a person has to die as a result of a defendant's inherently dangerous actions or actions taken with reckless disregard. > Typical penalties for a manslaughter conviction include at least one year in jail, and can be much worse if the conduct that led to the death merit such. For example, a repeat drunk driver that causes a death is likely to face a harsher sentence than a recently victimized elderly man who, instinctively, accidentally shoots someone they believe to be a robber. And I say the penalties should be worse because cars would be less obviously dangerous than guns in an era when most cars are self-driving. In short, a gun is a gun, and people know what guns are. If someone is waving a firearm around, well, most people who have competent faculties know that that's dangerous. In the era I'm foreseeing, which I think is the era most of us in this thread are foreseeing, a car is no longer as inherently dangerous as they are now, unless someone has made the conscious choice to make it that dangerous again by driving it manually. I also support greatly increased penalties for DUI, but that's going a bit afield.
- naravara 7y ago
  >Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. Why not just take a walk?
  - romwell 7y ago
    > I really like X and want to keep doing it >> When not do something entirely different altogether? Gotta love HN. For the sake of being Captain Obvious: people who like moving at fast speeds probably won't get the same enjoyment out of moving at slow speeds. As far as clearing the head goes, I heard from many people that they get into a kind of flow state while their hands have something to do while experiencing the effect of this activity. For some, it's playing the piano, listening to the sound, and getting lost in the thought. For others, it's operating a vehicle and seeing the lights whiz by. Different strokes for different folks, you know.
  - hitpointdrew 7y ago
    That is like saying "Hey I know you really love playing Tennis. That you enjoy the game, and how you feel when you play, and after the match. But we are going to outlaw Tennis, why don't you just go play Basketball instead? Mmmkay?"
    - hannasanarion 7y ago
      How many people are killed every year by inattentive or incompetent tennis players who think they're hot stuff?
      - hitpointdrew 7y ago
        If John Mcenroe comes out of retirement, it could be a lot.
      - charliesharding 7y ago
        Would you want alcohol to be banned because it causes harm as well? It's about losing personal liberty - people will dig in their heels.
- reidjs 7y ago
  Then go to a regulated track and drive to your heart's content? I don't like the idea of people just 'clearing their heads' while driving a 2 ton box at 65 miles per hour.
  - hitpointdrew 7y ago
    >go to a regulated track and drive Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 car, but now 2 cars, a trailer to legally transport the manual car. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say driving around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
    - icebraining 7y ago
      Not "getting" driving for enjoyment is not the same as stupidity, and you (the supporters of the association's goals) will have to convince a lot of people who don't get it. This is not a good approach.
    - hannasanarion 7y ago
      > Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 carriage, but now a motorcar and a trailer to legally transport the horses and carriage. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say galloping around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
      - hitpointdrew 7y ago
        Did you have point?
        hannasanarion 7y ago
        Yeah. Horses aren't extinct, and neither are horse enthusiasts.
      - CompanionCuuube 7y ago
- resoluteteeth 7y ago
  If we reach a point where manual driving is clearly unsafe compared to self-driving cars, do you really think that manual driving should continue to be legal simply so that you can "clear your head"? Anyway, barring a constitutional amendment, you can't pass a law now that will prevent a law banning manual driving from being passed in the future, so I think it's sort of a moot point.
- ahartmetz 7y ago
  Or driving can just be plain fun in itself. I enjoy driving unless it's more than ~3x (there and back) per week. I mean we control machines here, right? Cars are pretty interesting machines to control. I live in a big city so I don't need a car. I got one that is fun rather than useful. Small, light, quick to accelerate and around corners. The exact opposite of an SUV (what the hell is wrong with people...).
naravara 7y ago
I expect you're going to see automation go a lot further in enhancing people's driving than you'll ever see robo-taxis be a viable primary mode of transporation. So it's probably not necessary to worry about human drivers being illegal, but you might see cars without key safety features become illegal the same way seatbelts and airbags are required today. So no more riding the shoulder, automated enforcement of traffic laws (so no speeding, no rolling stops, must yield at a yield sign, etc.).
majormajor 7y ago
Nah, this is a good time for people to be thinking about it. If you refuse to think about things that aren't 100% yet, you'll find yourself flatfooted and at a huge disadvantage to those who did. Whether you're pro- or anti-driving, the debate is going to be carried out in public for years, not just after the technology is perfected. And likewise for whatever other sort of freedom-vs-safety issues that come up with technology.
bluGill 7y ago
You don't need to remove the steering wheel. An autonomous car can let any idiot driver (imagine your worse case bad driver here) drive safely. Want to weave in and out of traffic: no problem, the car won't let you hit any other car or go faster than is safe for that car.

lasagnaphil 7y ago

I was planning to write a cyberpunk dystopian short story which the nation banned all non-autonomous vehicles (basically, mega-corporations like Waymo and Uber have lobbied the government and spun the media with keywords such as 'safety' and 'efficiency'). But then there is a rag-tag group of people (car enthusiasts and motorcyclers) who demand the right to driving: to feel the winds and speed flowing over their shoulders as they indulge in the absolute freedom of movement. So they occasionally drive secretly and illegally, out of the eyes of the cameras of Waymo. The story starts with a chase scene with the Google police cars, which are also 100% autonomous. The rebels have managed to fake them by camouflaging their vehicles, but the police are now using special sonar technology which augments their camera vision. (And then one of the rebels know how to hack inside the autonomous-driving deep learning system, and then yadda yadda...) But now this fucking "right to drive" thing is actually becoming a fucking reality. The future is, simply cyberpunk. Help me, I'm getting headaches.

spaced-out 7y ago
Would your story also include incidents where innocent people are maimed or killed in accidents caused by those "rebels" while they were "feeling the winds and speed flowing over their shoulders..."?
300bps 7y ago
But now this fucking "right to drive" thing is actually becoming a fucking reality. 1.25 million people die per year from auto accidents in the world with as many as 20-50 million additional people injured or disabled. Source: https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/ https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/ The average car utilization is less than 4.5%. For over 95% of the time, most cars are just sitting there doing nothing. Source: https://www.reinventingparking.org/2013/02/cars-are-parked-95-of-time-lets-check.html https://www.reinventingparking.org/2013/02/cars-are-parked-9... Cars are the second largest expense for most people with the cost of the car, cost of maintenance, registration, insurance, parking, etc. coming only behind their residence in terms of cost. Manually driven cars are a wasteful luxury that kill over a million people per year. I can't wait until they go away.

jhbadger 7y ago

I doubt that human driving will ever be outlawed. Riding horses isn't outlawed after all. What is likely is that automated driving will be required for major highways, just like how horses are banned from them now.

hitpointdrew 7y ago
> Riding horses isn't outlawed after all. It is on major roads, which makes it impossible/impractical to use horse a legit mode of transportation.
- jhbadger 7y ago
  The Amish near where I live seem to get by with their horses and carts, but they aren't taking the Interstate.
  - smacktoward 7y ago
    This would be an interesting premise for a sci-fi story: an Amish-like subculture in a far-future America, only their level of acceptable technology stopped at the early 21st century instead of the early 19th. So they drive everywhere in gas-powered cars when everyone else is teleporting, amuse themselves with movies recorded on disc when everyone else is immersed in holographic VR, talk to each other on cellphones when everyone else communicates telepathically via brain implants, etc.
  - hitpointdrew 7y ago
    Yeah, in small isolated places I am sure it can work. But try taking a horse from Quincy, MA to Washing D.C. Like John Adams did many times. If self driving doesn't become "illegal" but regulated to small isolated areas (aka "tracks"), than you might as well just make it illegal. A lot of people who like driving won't be able to afford having a self driving car, and a manual driving car, a trailer so they can transport their manual driving car legally to the track. Not to mention, most tracks are boring, mostly flat, circles and not at all the same as driving on a mountainous road.

Spartan-S63 7y ago

I don't think we need to make human driving illegal. Rather, I think we should create a financial incentive _not_ to drive. Those who want to continue to drive cars can, but at a cost. Such a cost could be assuming all liability in the event of an accident with an autonomous vehicle. Under such a model, the human driver would always be at fault.

stronglikedan 7y ago
Or just let people drive if they like driving and hold them accountable, just like we do today. For those that don't like driving, create better options for them and let them fund it.
- bluGill 7y ago
  How do you hold someone responsible who kills on accident? I have lost friends because some driver didn't see them in the crosswalk...
  - stronglikedan 7y ago
    Killing someone in a crosswalk goes beyond mere accident. It's negligence, likely due to impatience. Of course the driver is responsible.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      My friend is dead. The killer got 7 months in jail... I'm not okay with anyone driving - including me. I don't see any currently feasible alternatives though. (buses and trains still have drivers)
icebraining 7y ago
Why? If human driving is really much more dangerous, then they'll be found at fault anyway.
herogreen 7y ago
But if you are not careful this will increase inequality between rich and poors.

nimbius 7y ago

Speaking as an engine mechanic by trade and a python programmer for hobby, im not sure how i feel about more electronics in cars just yet. However, some of them are just objectively meaningless. -Soundaktor. this is a tiny plastic speaker mounted in the footwell of most Volkswagen cars thats designed to make fake engine noises. The idea being, if the car sounds aggressive, people will enjoy it. Ford uses these as well, and if they die they will trigger an ODB code and a trip to the dealership to fix/replace. - engine auto-off/on. This is a feature that originally showed up on Mercedes trucks to prevent drivers from idling in docks or streets. They extended it to their luxury cars, and now most high end cars to this. The idea being that if you stop at a red light, the engine shuts off to "save gas." The only thing this feature does is halve the life of your starter motor and battery.

fh973 7y ago
Isn't auto one-off to save a few grams of average CO2 emissions on paper to save the customer some tax money in countries where CO2 emissions are the base for taxation?

drivingmenuts 7y ago

If you take away the steering and brakes, there is no way to clear a dead car out of traffic so everyone else can get on with their lives. Take those away and your car is suddenly blocking me because the power system shit the bed, I’m gonna be considering violence very shortly.

yial 7y ago

So reading through their website... I’m not convinced that this is a real movement. Due to the layout, the prominence of the store part, etc, it really feels more like it’s a web store that has struck upon trendy marketing in the guise of fighting for the right to drive.