4 ms·

Maybe an unpopular opinion: I don't want this. I don't want any of this. Don't block my windshield with your "helpful" alerts. I don't care, I can drive withou

Maybe an unpopular opinion: I don't want this. I don't want any of this. Don't block my windshield with your "helpful" alerts. I don't care, I can drive without them, that's how I (and millions of others) learned to drive. I want a physical key. I want the engine not to cut off when I'm stopped at a traffic light or stop sign. I don't want more cameras, whether facing the occupants, or facing the road. Cars are already "good enough", and have been for years. Why do we need to keep adding software and other janky "features" that create more failure points and more expensive repairs?

renewiltord 6y ago
> Why do we need to keep adding software and other janky "features" that create more failure points and more expensive repairs? Because I like them and I'll pay more for the car than you will. And there are more people like me.
ampdepolymerase 6y ago
Because idling the engine is bad for the environment, because the lack of cameras makes things more dangerous for everyone.
snemvalts 6y ago
No, cars haven't been good enough for years. There's tons of fuel savings technologies being developed and added to reduce carbon emissions and pollution as much as possible (widespread turbocharging, start-stop, mild hybrid and full hybrid, smaller displacement, particulate filters). Not to talk about safety, with the forward-collision warning etc. You can always get a 20 year old Toyota, and that will be more-or-less what you described. But if you want to buy a modern car and drive it on public roads, you have to abide by the rules.
viraptor 6y ago
> I want the engine not to cut off when I'm stopped at a traffic light or stop sign. Are there any cars where you can't turn it off? I thought the switch is pretty standard. > I don't want more cameras Why wouldn't you want a camera on the back? I get some other points, but this one is pure improvement of safety with no drawbacks I can think of.
- valleyer 6y ago
  To the first point, GP is referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system
  - viraptor 6y ago
    Yes, I get that. And in every car I've seen with it, I could turn that automatic behaviour off. (Apart from hybrids, where that's the whole point of having a hybrid)

renewiltord 6y ago

> Why do we need to keep adding software and other janky "features" that create more failure points and more expensive repairs? Because I like them and I'll pay more for the car than you will. And there are more people like me.

ampdepolymerase 6y ago

Because idling the engine is bad for the environment, because the lack of cameras makes things more dangerous for everyone.

snemvalts 6y ago

No, cars haven't been good enough for years. There's tons of fuel savings technologies being developed and added to reduce carbon emissions and pollution as much as possible (widespread turbocharging, start-stop, mild hybrid and full hybrid, smaller displacement, particulate filters). Not to talk about safety, with the forward-collision warning etc. You can always get a 20 year old Toyota, and that will be more-or-less what you described. But if you want to buy a modern car and drive it on public roads, you have to abide by the rules.

viraptor 6y ago

> I want the engine not to cut off when I'm stopped at a traffic light or stop sign. Are there any cars where you can't turn it off? I thought the switch is pretty standard. > I don't want more cameras Why wouldn't you want a camera on the back? I get some other points, but this one is pure improvement of safety with no drawbacks I can think of.

valleyer 6y ago
To the first point, GP is referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Start-stop_system
- viraptor 6y ago
  Yes, I get that. And in every car I've seen with it, I could turn that automatic behaviour off. (Apart from hybrids, where that's the whole point of having a hybrid)