5 ms·

I don't think this is correct. A lot of the new driver assistance technologies are having a significant effect on safety: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/new-r

I don't think this is correct. A lot of the new driver assistance technologies are having a significant effect on safety: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/new-report-shows-how-many-accidents-injuries-collision-avoidance-systems-prevent.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/22/new-report-shows-how-many-ac... These features are new in the last 10 years, some are new in the last couple years, and they are continually improving.

CamperBob2 7y ago
The effect appears to be negative if anything. That article is starkly (and suspiciously) alone in its conclusions, if you look at what's been happening statistically over the last few years. The systems will get better, but for the time being, they mostly serve to let drivers think they can get away with paying even less attention to the road than usual.
- uoaei 7y ago
  This is a "get off my lawn" sort of comment, but: Easy cars are making worse drivers. People rarely check their blind spot now because the little light on their sideview mirror lights up instead. People are less concerned about driving unsafely because their cars are thicker, heavier, and bigger than the other participants on the road. This has been especially troubling to watch develop from the bike lane, as visibility shrinks and auto manufacturers don't seem to test extensively whether their onboard radar can detect cyclists and pedestrians. It's created a very strange experience of driving where the person inside does not share the same reality as the outside except when their car is within 2 feet of another car. Cars are cages, not only physically, but mentally too.
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    People rarely check their blind spot no True, and another facet of the same problem is that blind spots are getting bigger by the model year, as automakers take the cheap way out and raise their belt lines to meet side-impact regulations. We will all be driving around in tanks before long. I guess that's supposed to be a good thing.
    - uoaei 7y ago
      > We will all be driving around in tanks before long. Car doors are close to a foot thick now. The cars are getting huge which means more space is occupied by the streets (increased lane width and space in intersections for larger turning radius), the parking lots (larger parking spots and wider spaces to drive between them), etc. The mental isolation between driver and environment is growing and does not seem to be decelerating. I'm convinced that maybe 10% of all drivers (in my area, suburban SV) pay any attention to what's happening behind them. They don't have to care, so they don't! Cars are devouring mobility.
  - interestica 7y ago
    Aren't we seeing our first requests from manufacturers to remove sideview mirrors entirely? To be replaced by cameras and video screens.
    - gpm 7y ago
      We've been seeing those requests for awhile now, e.g. this from 2016: https://www.oemoffhighway.com/electronics/sensors/proximity-detection-safety-systems/article/12246040/camera-systems-replace-side-view-mirrors https://www.oemoffhighway.com/electronics/sensors/proximity-...
      - interestica 7y ago
        Are these in use now?
    - CamperBob2 7y ago
      Not necessarily a bad thing, see my other comment about how ridiculously bad exterior visibility is becoming. It seems that each new model year brings higher beltlines, less glass... and more distracting "safety" gadgets that only sort of work. Few drivers use their mirrors, and even fewer adjust them properly, so they might as well be next on the chopping block.
  - salawat 7y ago
    Let's not fall into "cager" rhetoric. I've been on the opposite side of that where I've rolled down my window to ask some cyclists to not dwell behind my A pillar when driving in the city, just to be ignored. We're all locomoters, and we have finite road to share, but I do agree that some of these safety systems are probably having a deleterious effect on driving skill and overall awareness in that all the driver assist mechanisms are not being treated as instruments that can fail. They should be considered no replacement for human attention, which I think is unfortunately what is happening. Similar to how safety device advances in football have actually made the injuries more severe due to the players taking greater risks. As long as we're all on the same infrastructure, we've all got to commit to respecting each other's presence. Cyclist and motorist alike.
    - uoaei 7y ago
      I agree with the rest of your comment, but > respecting each other's presence. Cyclist and motorist alike. I truly hate the equivocation rhetoric used in these discussions on mobility because they obfuscate the insurmountable power dynamics at play. Let's fall into cager rhetoric; cars are cages now more than ever. Cyclists aren't obligated to respect motorists if motorists act with scant care toward the cyclists' lives. Yes, yes, "not all motorists" just like "not all cyclists" but it's hard to overcome the difference between a 1000kg car and a 10kg bike. Reciprocity, man. Have some respect for the power you wield behind the steering wheel. When I ride, I already do so under the assumption that the cars have absolutely no idea I'm there despite me following all traffic laws to a 'T'. And I'm still right-hooked at least once each way to the gym (20-30min ride on a 4-lane road). Most recently I was riding next to a cop one time when the person in front of him not only overtook me within 3ft but also swerved into the bike lane multiple times ahead of me. I approached him and raised my concerns, and was met with an absolute deadpan stare before he drove away without a word. My argument is not one that supports cyclists behaving aggressively toward motorists. It should be mandatory during driving school to spend some time on a bike on busy roads.
      - Retric 7y ago
        This is not a case of respect on the road. In 49 states a driver making a right turn should enter the bike lane before their turn. That’s what the dashed lines mean. However, it’s very rarely been taught in drivers ed and to my knowledge there has never been a major public safety campaign on this issue.
Retric 7y ago
It’s not showing up in fatality rates. 2009 had 1.15 deaths per 100 million miles, 2018 had 1.13 but that difference is just noise. With 2014 down at 1.08 and 2016 up at 1.19. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... Of course plenty of older cars are still on the road, but collision avoidance systems have been on the roads for years and don’t seem to be having significant impact. Granted, driver behaviors may be getting worse, but going back further and you see significant declines which just stall out around 2009.
- theptip 7y ago
  > It’s not showing up in fatality rates. Fair, it does seem like the overall statistics don't show this. I'm having trouble squaring this with the data showing that these technologies are preventing accidents. > Granted, driver behaviors may be getting worse I wonder whether the top quartile is getting significantly better (thus resulting in the great "crashes avoided" numbers that these technologies claim) while everyone else is getting more distracted with their cell phones, causing an overall increase in the average number of crashes. This goes into a bit more detail, suggesting that pedestrian fatalities due to more SUVs could also be driving the increase in fatalities: https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17933536/traffic-death-crash-statistics-nhtsa-us-2017 https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17933536/traffic-death-cr... So it could also be a "safer for me, more dangerous for you" situation too with these new vehicles.
  - Retric 7y ago
    It might also be that fatal accidents are much harder for automated driving systems to prevent. They could drastically reduce parking lot fender benders or low speed rear end collisions, but those are ultra low risk. Someone doing 140+MPH is going to receive minimal benifits from 1/8th of a second of early breaking before hitting a tree. Similarly, losing control on ice and driving off a cliff, or getting hit with a jackknifed semi truck etc.

CamperBob2 7y ago

The effect appears to be negative if anything. That article is starkly (and suspiciously) alone in its conclusions, if you look at what's been happening statistically over the last few years. The systems will get better, but for the time being, they mostly serve to let drivers think they can get away with paying even less attention to the road than usual.

uoaei 7y ago
This is a "get off my lawn" sort of comment, but: Easy cars are making worse drivers. People rarely check their blind spot now because the little light on their sideview mirror lights up instead. People are less concerned about driving unsafely because their cars are thicker, heavier, and bigger than the other participants on the road. This has been especially troubling to watch develop from the bike lane, as visibility shrinks and auto manufacturers don't seem to test extensively whether their onboard radar can detect cyclists and pedestrians. It's created a very strange experience of driving where the person inside does not share the same reality as the outside except when their car is within 2 feet of another car. Cars are cages, not only physically, but mentally too.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  People rarely check their blind spot no True, and another facet of the same problem is that blind spots are getting bigger by the model year, as automakers take the cheap way out and raise their belt lines to meet side-impact regulations. We will all be driving around in tanks before long. I guess that's supposed to be a good thing.
  - uoaei 7y ago
    > We will all be driving around in tanks before long. Car doors are close to a foot thick now. The cars are getting huge which means more space is occupied by the streets (increased lane width and space in intersections for larger turning radius), the parking lots (larger parking spots and wider spaces to drive between them), etc. The mental isolation between driver and environment is growing and does not seem to be decelerating. I'm convinced that maybe 10% of all drivers (in my area, suburban SV) pay any attention to what's happening behind them. They don't have to care, so they don't! Cars are devouring mobility.
- interestica 7y ago
  Aren't we seeing our first requests from manufacturers to remove sideview mirrors entirely? To be replaced by cameras and video screens.
  - gpm 7y ago
    We've been seeing those requests for awhile now, e.g. this from 2016: https://www.oemoffhighway.com/electronics/sensors/proximity-detection-safety-systems/article/12246040/camera-systems-replace-side-view-mirrors https://www.oemoffhighway.com/electronics/sensors/proximity-...
    - interestica 7y ago
      Are these in use now?
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    Not necessarily a bad thing, see my other comment about how ridiculously bad exterior visibility is becoming. It seems that each new model year brings higher beltlines, less glass... and more distracting "safety" gadgets that only sort of work. Few drivers use their mirrors, and even fewer adjust them properly, so they might as well be next on the chopping block.
- salawat 7y ago
  Let's not fall into "cager" rhetoric. I've been on the opposite side of that where I've rolled down my window to ask some cyclists to not dwell behind my A pillar when driving in the city, just to be ignored. We're all locomoters, and we have finite road to share, but I do agree that some of these safety systems are probably having a deleterious effect on driving skill and overall awareness in that all the driver assist mechanisms are not being treated as instruments that can fail. They should be considered no replacement for human attention, which I think is unfortunately what is happening. Similar to how safety device advances in football have actually made the injuries more severe due to the players taking greater risks. As long as we're all on the same infrastructure, we've all got to commit to respecting each other's presence. Cyclist and motorist alike.
  - uoaei 7y ago
    I agree with the rest of your comment, but > respecting each other's presence. Cyclist and motorist alike. I truly hate the equivocation rhetoric used in these discussions on mobility because they obfuscate the insurmountable power dynamics at play. Let's fall into cager rhetoric; cars are cages now more than ever. Cyclists aren't obligated to respect motorists if motorists act with scant care toward the cyclists' lives. Yes, yes, "not all motorists" just like "not all cyclists" but it's hard to overcome the difference between a 1000kg car and a 10kg bike. Reciprocity, man. Have some respect for the power you wield behind the steering wheel. When I ride, I already do so under the assumption that the cars have absolutely no idea I'm there despite me following all traffic laws to a 'T'. And I'm still right-hooked at least once each way to the gym (20-30min ride on a 4-lane road). Most recently I was riding next to a cop one time when the person in front of him not only overtook me within 3ft but also swerved into the bike lane multiple times ahead of me. I approached him and raised my concerns, and was met with an absolute deadpan stare before he drove away without a word. My argument is not one that supports cyclists behaving aggressively toward motorists. It should be mandatory during driving school to spend some time on a bike on busy roads.
    - Retric 7y ago
      This is not a case of respect on the road. In 49 states a driver making a right turn should enter the bike lane before their turn. That’s what the dashed lines mean. However, it’s very rarely been taught in drivers ed and to my knowledge there has never been a major public safety campaign on this issue.

Retric 7y ago

It’s not showing up in fatality rates. 2009 had 1.15 deaths per 100 million miles, 2018 had 1.13 but that difference is just noise. With 2014 down at 1.08 and 2016 up at 1.19. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... Of course plenty of older cars are still on the road, but collision avoidance systems have been on the roads for years and don’t seem to be having significant impact. Granted, driver behaviors may be getting worse, but going back further and you see significant declines which just stall out around 2009.

theptip 7y ago
> It’s not showing up in fatality rates. Fair, it does seem like the overall statistics don't show this. I'm having trouble squaring this with the data showing that these technologies are preventing accidents. > Granted, driver behaviors may be getting worse I wonder whether the top quartile is getting significantly better (thus resulting in the great "crashes avoided" numbers that these technologies claim) while everyone else is getting more distracted with their cell phones, causing an overall increase in the average number of crashes. This goes into a bit more detail, suggesting that pedestrian fatalities due to more SUVs could also be driving the increase in fatalities: https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17933536/traffic-death-crash-statistics-nhtsa-us-2017 https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17933536/traffic-death-cr... So it could also be a "safer for me, more dangerous for you" situation too with these new vehicles.
- Retric 7y ago
  It might also be that fatal accidents are much harder for automated driving systems to prevent. They could drastically reduce parking lot fender benders or low speed rear end collisions, but those are ultra low risk. Someone doing 140+MPH is going to receive minimal benifits from 1/8th of a second of early breaking before hitting a tree. Similarly, losing control on ice and driving off a cliff, or getting hit with a jackknifed semi truck etc.