9 ms·

So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? I would totally buy a brand new car without all the "visible" electronics (by visible I mean all the sc

So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? I would totally buy a brand new car without all the "visible" electronics (by visible I mean all the screens and doodads. I don't mind ABS and other "invisible" electronics as long as they are reliable which is not a given nowadays). I don't get the point of turning the interior of a car into a smartphone experience. I watched a YT video of a Mercedess class S review. So many screens, leds, buttons etc. The reviewer was so busy fiddling with the controls that he never saw a pedestrian woman wanting to cross the road. If she hadn't payed attention he would probably have hit her.

Loughla 5y ago
Honestly, non-tactile buttons on a car seems ridiculous. You HAVE to look away from the road to do anything. Tactile buttons let you feel around to do things if you need to. That change has made zero sense to me.
- virtue3 5y ago
  Especially with the shit microcontrollers they put into the toyota mid range cars and their lack of responsiveness. Really forces you to look at the screen when you fidget with it.
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    Those shit micros in the infotainment system are still running at least in the hundreds of MHz. PCs from 25 years ago with equivalent performance were responsive. It's poor software development practices that makes good enough hardware crawl at a snail's pace.
- Silhouette 5y ago
  It's also scary just how many controls there are now, tactile or otherwise, that have little to do with safely driving the car and navigating efficiently to your destination. Until we have truly autonomous vehicles, all those distractions are accidents waiting to happen (or sometimes, sadly, not waiting). Touch controls for anything a driver needs to manipulate while driving are obviously ridiculous, so there's not much else to say there. But given how dangerous using a phone while driving is under most circumstances, what on earth are phone-related controls doing taking up prime real estate on a steering wheel in so many modern vehicles, even if they're tactile? Either way, it's like the car makers said "OK, we get that using these features while driving is about as dangerous as driving while you're drunk, but the kind of person who will buy our premium vehicles is going to be grossly irresponsible anyway, so they might as well have an easy time doing it." And then after distracting the driver's attention and giving them lots to look at other than what they actually need for driving, they act all surprised that the driver who was "required to be fully aware and able to take over control of the vehicle immediately at any time" was messing around with the infotainment system with lane keeping, cruise control and automatic distance keeping turned on instead of watching the road, and point to the legal small print when the inevitable tragedy happens because of course the driver was not actually able to take over immediately when something unexpected happened. This whole issue makes my blood boil. It's like the worst example of prioritising flash and gimmicks at the expense of making something that actually works properly, and in a context where safety is a huge factor and people are literally dying unnecessarily every day. These kinds of idiocy should have been regulated out of existence the day after they were announced.
- bashinator 5y ago
  Isn’t Mazda discontinuing use of touch screens?
  - genocidicbunny 5y ago
    That is their plan as far as I know. And even before that, their interfaces have generally been pretty good about tactility. My '17 does have a touchscreen, but it is entirely optional and everything can be controlled using physical controls.
  - ghostpepper 5y ago
    I bought a Mazda CX-5 last year and in the dealership, one of the televisions was playing an endless loop of Mazda commercials, and one of the commercials was specifically about how all the important controls are on physical buttons / knobs / switches. Mazda is clearly aware that they work better, but I'm sure customers who don't drive often or don't pay attention to the experience of driving simply assume that a larger touchscreen is better and somehow more modern. I sometimes even turn the screen off completely, on long drives or at night; I only wish there was a dedicated button to do so. The car is great too - it has dedicated buttons for pretty much everything else, including a dedicated, physical volume knob in the center armrest and track change buttons on the steering wheel, climate control, various driver assistance features, etc. It was all clearly designed with the driver in mind, and the touchscreen was an afterthought.
  - jmnicolas 5y ago
    I drive a 2018 Mazda 3. The touch functionality is disabled while the car is moving, everything is done with a wheel and a few buttons. It works well but it's a pretty basic system (nav and audio that's it). I don't know if it could accommodate advanced features.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  Just seems strange that it's 2021 already and touchscreens are still considered acceptable in cars. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/11/20800111/us-navy-uss-john-s-mccain-crash-ntsb-report-touchscreen-mechanical-controls https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/11/20800111/us-navy-uss-john...
- Aerroon 5y ago
  Using a cellphone while driving is illegal? Let's just make the whole car a cellphone! Brilliant! It makes new wonder how these non-tactile buttons and entertainment systems are even legal to use while driving. And if you had to stop your car to adjust the radio then these touch screens would immediately disappear.
  - ghostpepper 5y ago
    I swear I don't work for Mazda but their new cars actually have a feature that disables touch on the screen above 5km/h. You can still use the tactile buttons though. It's actually not ideal because now the passenger can't use it either, but at least they've made an attempt to stop drivers interacting with the screen at high speeds.
hoseja 5y ago
Reminds me of a Rubberbandits classic.
sokoloff 5y ago
> I don't mind ABS and other "invisible" electronics as long as they are reliable which is not a given nowadays These are pretty damned reliable, IMO, in absolute terms (before even giving credit for the fact than an automobile is pretty harsh environment for electronics with temperature and humidity swings, large voltage transients, poor grounds, mechanical shock/vibration, road salt, corrosion, etc). I've probably changed more power window regulators than ABS or EFI modules.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  I've never had an EFI fail (knock on wood) but my main car right now has had a failed ABS for several years (too expensive to repair vs. value of the vehicle).
  - epanchin 5y ago
    or cheap, vs the cost of running someone down.
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      ABS does not significantly shorten stopping distances. It does provide improved steering control during brake applications that would otherwise exceed available traction, but I think it's extremely rare that ABS would be the difference between a pedestrian collision vs not. (They could just as easily choose a car that didn't have ABS as originally equipped and no one would say anything about the omission.)
      - cnasc 5y ago
        > They could just as easily choose a car that didn't have ABS as originally equipped and no one would say anything about the omission. That’s the kind of failure case I wish fancy electronics had. Component breaks = now you’re driving a lower trim-level. As opposed to $5000 touchscreen module dies and now you can’t use the car.
paaakthecaaa 5y ago
Unfortunately, modern regulations forbid manufacturers from easily making a "dumb car". For example, backup cameras are required in new cars. It's the same deal with avoiding wire insulation that rodents enjoy eating. Your only option is to buy a car from before 2000-ish. I'd actually like to find a DIY subculture of taking old car frames and swapping in newer features a bit at a time. People do it with electric motors, but it still seems hard to get decent range/mileage/etc on a DIY EV project.
- sjg007 5y ago
  >Unfortunately, modern regulations forbid manufacturers from easily making a "dumb car". This is not true.
  - nomuthetart 5y ago
    It is true as of 2018: https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/driver-assistance-technologies https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/driver-assistance-technologi... Does NHTSA recommend rearview video systems? Yes. As of May 2018, NHTSA requires this lifesaving technology on all new vehicles. We recommend you look for RVSs that meet NHTSA’s performance specifications when shopping for a vehicle.
    - OldHand2018 5y ago
      The actual requirement is a series of rear visibility tests that are done on a vehicle through the full range of seat adjustability. A rear view camera allows any vehicle to meet the regulation regardless of vehicle styling and design. They are cheap, too. But they are not strictly required. Your average 1980s sedan probably would meet the requirement as long as it had mirrors on the driver and passenger side. Here is the regulation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.111 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.111
      - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
        You're not wrong but in practice they're all but required because the corner that fuel economy and cabin strength requirements box you into is a corner with really high belt-lines and really poor visibility. You couldn't build something that's the shape of a 1990s sedan today.
second--shift 5y ago
> So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? You say this in jest, but depending on your locale and transport needs, you could consider a motorcycle or bicycle. The interface is a bit like riding a horse, just more 21st century (obviously). Modern bikes come with ABS and fuel injection, and tires these days are great. Motorcycles don't come with any of the annoying road-car nanny-state stuff. Riding a bike is cool too.
- silicon2401 5y ago
  If I lived in the countryside (which I wouldn't mind) I would consider this, but otherwise I personally couldn't justify the risk. I forget where I read it, but the phrase "right of weight, not right of way" comes to mind. It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks.
  - kroltan 5y ago
    > It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks. This would be a dream. I live in a reasonably deserted/seasonal neighbourhood, so it has a neat 2-lane divided avenue down the middle, but it is usually very empty (a car maybe every minute). This doesn't mean I can ride anywhere but the very edge of the asphalt, almost tripping my pedals on the sidewalk rise (I forget the word in English), since drivers love to pick up some speed in the avenue and drive at frankly disrespectfully close distances, even though they could have almost entire lane of distance to a cyclist.
    - nanis 5y ago
      >> It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks. > This would be a dream. Or the kind of urban nightmare where motorcycles (sorry, battery assisted bicycles) are rushing down sidewalks at 20 mph, barely missing baby carriages, dogs, and other humans.
      - kroltan 5y ago
        Not here, because the sidewalks are not continuous or very well maintained, so such ill folk would not be able to rush at their desired maximum speed.
brokenmachine 5y ago
>So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? Yes, but only so long as you don't take your cellphone with you.

Loughla 5y ago

Honestly, non-tactile buttons on a car seems ridiculous. You HAVE to look away from the road to do anything. Tactile buttons let you feel around to do things if you need to. That change has made zero sense to me.

virtue3 5y ago
Especially with the shit microcontrollers they put into the toyota mid range cars and their lack of responsiveness. Really forces you to look at the screen when you fidget with it.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  Those shit micros in the infotainment system are still running at least in the hundreds of MHz. PCs from 25 years ago with equivalent performance were responsive. It's poor software development practices that makes good enough hardware crawl at a snail's pace.
Silhouette 5y ago
It's also scary just how many controls there are now, tactile or otherwise, that have little to do with safely driving the car and navigating efficiently to your destination. Until we have truly autonomous vehicles, all those distractions are accidents waiting to happen (or sometimes, sadly, not waiting). Touch controls for anything a driver needs to manipulate while driving are obviously ridiculous, so there's not much else to say there. But given how dangerous using a phone while driving is under most circumstances, what on earth are phone-related controls doing taking up prime real estate on a steering wheel in so many modern vehicles, even if they're tactile? Either way, it's like the car makers said "OK, we get that using these features while driving is about as dangerous as driving while you're drunk, but the kind of person who will buy our premium vehicles is going to be grossly irresponsible anyway, so they might as well have an easy time doing it." And then after distracting the driver's attention and giving them lots to look at other than what they actually need for driving, they act all surprised that the driver who was "required to be fully aware and able to take over control of the vehicle immediately at any time" was messing around with the infotainment system with lane keeping, cruise control and automatic distance keeping turned on instead of watching the road, and point to the legal small print when the inevitable tragedy happens because of course the driver was not actually able to take over immediately when something unexpected happened. This whole issue makes my blood boil. It's like the worst example of prioritising flash and gimmicks at the expense of making something that actually works properly, and in a context where safety is a huge factor and people are literally dying unnecessarily every day. These kinds of idiocy should have been regulated out of existence the day after they were announced.
bashinator 5y ago
Isn’t Mazda discontinuing use of touch screens?
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  That is their plan as far as I know. And even before that, their interfaces have generally been pretty good about tactility. My '17 does have a touchscreen, but it is entirely optional and everything can be controlled using physical controls.
- ghostpepper 5y ago
  I bought a Mazda CX-5 last year and in the dealership, one of the televisions was playing an endless loop of Mazda commercials, and one of the commercials was specifically about how all the important controls are on physical buttons / knobs / switches. Mazda is clearly aware that they work better, but I'm sure customers who don't drive often or don't pay attention to the experience of driving simply assume that a larger touchscreen is better and somehow more modern. I sometimes even turn the screen off completely, on long drives or at night; I only wish there was a dedicated button to do so. The car is great too - it has dedicated buttons for pretty much everything else, including a dedicated, physical volume knob in the center armrest and track change buttons on the steering wheel, climate control, various driver assistance features, etc. It was all clearly designed with the driver in mind, and the touchscreen was an afterthought.
- jmnicolas 5y ago
  I drive a 2018 Mazda 3. The touch functionality is disabled while the car is moving, everything is done with a wheel and a few buttons. It works well but it's a pretty basic system (nav and audio that's it). I don't know if it could accommodate advanced features.
rsj_hn 5y ago
Just seems strange that it's 2021 already and touchscreens are still considered acceptable in cars. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/11/20800111/us-navy-uss-john-s-mccain-crash-ntsb-report-touchscreen-mechanical-controls https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/11/20800111/us-navy-uss-john...
Aerroon 5y ago
Using a cellphone while driving is illegal? Let's just make the whole car a cellphone! Brilliant! It makes new wonder how these non-tactile buttons and entertainment systems are even legal to use while driving. And if you had to stop your car to adjust the radio then these touch screens would immediately disappear.
- ghostpepper 5y ago
  I swear I don't work for Mazda but their new cars actually have a feature that disables touch on the screen above 5km/h. You can still use the tactile buttons though. It's actually not ideal because now the passenger can't use it either, but at least they've made an attempt to stop drivers interacting with the screen at high speeds.

hoseja 5y ago

Reminds me of a Rubberbandits classic.

sokoloff 5y ago

> I don't mind ABS and other "invisible" electronics as long as they are reliable which is not a given nowadays These are pretty damned reliable, IMO, in absolute terms (before even giving credit for the fact than an automobile is pretty harsh environment for electronics with temperature and humidity swings, large voltage transients, poor grounds, mechanical shock/vibration, road salt, corrosion, etc). I've probably changed more power window regulators than ABS or EFI modules.

throwawayboise 5y ago
I've never had an EFI fail (knock on wood) but my main car right now has had a failed ABS for several years (too expensive to repair vs. value of the vehicle).
- epanchin 5y ago
  or cheap, vs the cost of running someone down.
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    ABS does not significantly shorten stopping distances. It does provide improved steering control during brake applications that would otherwise exceed available traction, but I think it's extremely rare that ABS would be the difference between a pedestrian collision vs not. (They could just as easily choose a car that didn't have ABS as originally equipped and no one would say anything about the omission.)
    - cnasc 5y ago
      > They could just as easily choose a car that didn't have ABS as originally equipped and no one would say anything about the omission. That’s the kind of failure case I wish fancy electronics had. Component breaks = now you’re driving a lower trim-level. As opposed to $5000 touchscreen module dies and now you can’t use the car.

paaakthecaaa 5y ago

Unfortunately, modern regulations forbid manufacturers from easily making a "dumb car". For example, backup cameras are required in new cars. It's the same deal with avoiding wire insulation that rodents enjoy eating. Your only option is to buy a car from before 2000-ish. I'd actually like to find a DIY subculture of taking old car frames and swapping in newer features a bit at a time. People do it with electric motors, but it still seems hard to get decent range/mileage/etc on a DIY EV project.

sjg007 5y ago
>Unfortunately, modern regulations forbid manufacturers from easily making a "dumb car". This is not true.
- nomuthetart 5y ago
  It is true as of 2018: https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/driver-assistance-technologies https://www.nhtsa.gov/equipment/driver-assistance-technologi... Does NHTSA recommend rearview video systems? Yes. As of May 2018, NHTSA requires this lifesaving technology on all new vehicles. We recommend you look for RVSs that meet NHTSA’s performance specifications when shopping for a vehicle.
  - OldHand2018 5y ago
    The actual requirement is a series of rear visibility tests that are done on a vehicle through the full range of seat adjustability. A rear view camera allows any vehicle to meet the regulation regardless of vehicle styling and design. They are cheap, too. But they are not strictly required. Your average 1980s sedan probably would meet the requirement as long as it had mirrors on the driver and passenger side. Here is the regulation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.111 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.111
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      You're not wrong but in practice they're all but required because the corner that fuel economy and cabin strength requirements box you into is a corner with really high belt-lines and really poor visibility. You couldn't build something that's the shape of a 1990s sedan today.

second--shift 5y ago

> So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? You say this in jest, but depending on your locale and transport needs, you could consider a motorcycle or bicycle. The interface is a bit like riding a horse, just more 21st century (obviously). Modern bikes come with ABS and fuel injection, and tires these days are great. Motorcycles don't come with any of the annoying road-car nanny-state stuff. Riding a bike is cool too.

silicon2401 5y ago
If I lived in the countryside (which I wouldn't mind) I would consider this, but otherwise I personally couldn't justify the risk. I forget where I read it, but the phrase "right of weight, not right of way" comes to mind. It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks.
- kroltan 5y ago
  > It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks. This would be a dream. I live in a reasonably deserted/seasonal neighbourhood, so it has a neat 2-lane divided avenue down the middle, but it is usually very empty (a car maybe every minute). This doesn't mean I can ride anywhere but the very edge of the asphalt, almost tripping my pedals on the sidewalk rise (I forget the word in English), since drivers love to pick up some speed in the avenue and drive at frankly disrespectfully close distances, even though they could have almost entire lane of distance to a cyclist.
  - nanis 5y ago
    >> It's also why I love that my hometown allows riding bikes on sidewalks. > This would be a dream. Or the kind of urban nightmare where motorcycles (sorry, battery assisted bicycles) are rushing down sidewalks at 20 mph, barely missing baby carriages, dogs, and other humans.
    - kroltan 5y ago
      Not here, because the sidewalks are not continuous or very well maintained, so such ill folk would not be able to rush at their desired maximum speed.

brokenmachine 5y ago

>So do I have to ride horses to get my privacy back now? Yes, but only so long as you don't take your cellphone with you.