3 ms·
It's not fair to frame it as an anti-failsafe, when it was designed to prevent shutting down after the ride starts. The core safety systems in modern cars that
by dahart 6y ago
It's not fair to frame it as an anti-failsafe, when it was designed to prevent shutting down after the ride starts. The core safety systems in modern cars that you cite can all be disabled electronically. (BTW, think a bit about a Tesla.) This really isn't a the good example of pro-safety critical design you think it is, cars have exactly the same "back doors" as this airbag vest at the engineering / electronic control level.
- setr 6y ago>This really isn't a the good example of pro-safety critical design you think it is, cars have exactly the same "back doors" as this airbag vest at the engineering / electronic control level. You're going to have to back that up to convince me of that, because as I said, AFAIK that's the not the case (not that I know much on car safety mechanisms -- but I've yet to hear/see anything suggesting to the contrary beyond this statement). >It's not fair to frame it as an anti-failsafe, when it was designed to prevent shutting down after the ride starts. You know what; that did the trick. I'm convinced. You're right, if they designed it as purely a boot-up flag (it turns on, or it turns off, but it's designed to be 100% up unconditionally once on) then it doesn't conflict with anything I've said. There's no additional risk being introduced that I can imagine from this setup -- beyond that inherit to the problem. I still find the framing pretty dumb -- they should have just called it a rental -- but otherwise I'm fully convinced this is a non-issue.
- dahart 6y agoYeah, agreed, the marketing angle seems to be miscalculated.