3 ms·

> could look to the cars metrics like I am driving drunk Same as sudden acceleration or breaking. Don't buy car like this.

eliasmacpherson 5y ago
It's the same problem as the 737MAX MCAS, features shoehorned in, probably with bugs, poorly advertised, lack of training, misfeatures sold as default, leading to fatal pilot/driver confusion. My elderly parent has bought a car with some of these features second hand, it will be great fun figuring out what is working as designed when a heavy vehicle has lost control and is lurching towards us at high speed. https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/vulnerable-road-user-auto-emergency-braking https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/vulnerable-r... https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/driver-attention-detection https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/driver-atten... https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/lane-keep-assist https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/lane-keep-as...
_0ffh 5y ago
> Don't buy car like this So how exactly would that work, given that there will be no options?
- helge9210 5y ago
  Don't use car at all, for example.
  - _0ffh 5y ago
    For some people that is not an option.
    - Steltek 5y ago
      That is the root cause of why this is being introduced and why there's a fight. As a society, the US absolutely refuses to prioritize safe driving over access to driving. We accept road deaths as the cost of business for our suburban sprawl and car-only infrastructure. Cars are the only option because so many places don't even have sidewalks, forget buses and bike lanes. Hell, in red states, you'll be terrorized by drivers simply for being on a bicycle.
    - helge9210 5y ago
      You can pay someone, who has no objections to implemented safety measures, to provide you with transportation services.
      - ehnto 5y ago
        You are being unempathetic and dismissive to the issues it raises, that is not a solution to the problem raised, nor is "Just don't drive". This isn't about the specific safety measure in question, the issue is invasive technology mandates in personal vehicles potentially excluding people from driving due to a desire to not be tracked by technology companies and government services. Imagine if they mandated the same thing on your smartphone. The answer could be "Don't use a smartphone", but that's obviously not an inclusive option. "Be tracked or exclude yourself from the modern world" is simply not a fair way to approach issues like this. Consider as well that the US has built a society heavily based around personal car usage, towns and cities are built around it, jobs and education expect it of you. So you are born into a car-first society, but then given the ultimatum of tracking and monitoring or reduced freedom of movement.
        helge9210 5y ago
        > potentially excluding people from driving Apparently here we have different understanding. Everyone by default is excluded from driving. Driving a vehicle is not a right, it is a privilege, granted only to those who are willing to receive training, are able to pass test and are ready to operate vehicle that conforms to regulations. If vehicle is not within regulations limit it may not leave private property.
        ehnto 5y ago
        I don't believe driving a vehicle is a right. I agree with you on all points in this comment. I do believe everyone should have equal opportunity to prove they can drive a road legal vehicle safely, and a they should be able to do that without the metrics of their journeys forever after being recorded by technology companies, and the safe operation of their car being decided by technology devices watching them drive. I think you just don't agree with that. Just imagine it. Machine learning algorithms deciding whether you're drunk or not, and stopping your car from moving if it thinks you are. What could possibly go wrong?

eliasmacpherson 5y ago

It's the same problem as the 737MAX MCAS, features shoehorned in, probably with bugs, poorly advertised, lack of training, misfeatures sold as default, leading to fatal pilot/driver confusion. My elderly parent has bought a car with some of these features second hand, it will be great fun figuring out what is working as designed when a heavy vehicle has lost control and is lurching towards us at high speed. https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/vulnerable-road-user-auto-emergency-braking https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/vulnerable-r... https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/driver-attention-detection https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/driver-atten... https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/lane-keep-assist https://howsafeisyourcar.com.au/safety-features/lane-keep-as...

_0ffh 5y ago

> Don't buy car like this So how exactly would that work, given that there will be no options?

helge9210 5y ago
Don't use car at all, for example.
- _0ffh 5y ago
  For some people that is not an option.
  - Steltek 5y ago
    That is the root cause of why this is being introduced and why there's a fight. As a society, the US absolutely refuses to prioritize safe driving over access to driving. We accept road deaths as the cost of business for our suburban sprawl and car-only infrastructure. Cars are the only option because so many places don't even have sidewalks, forget buses and bike lanes. Hell, in red states, you'll be terrorized by drivers simply for being on a bicycle.
  - helge9210 5y ago
    You can pay someone, who has no objections to implemented safety measures, to provide you with transportation services.
    - ehnto 5y ago
      You are being unempathetic and dismissive to the issues it raises, that is not a solution to the problem raised, nor is "Just don't drive". This isn't about the specific safety measure in question, the issue is invasive technology mandates in personal vehicles potentially excluding people from driving due to a desire to not be tracked by technology companies and government services. Imagine if they mandated the same thing on your smartphone. The answer could be "Don't use a smartphone", but that's obviously not an inclusive option. "Be tracked or exclude yourself from the modern world" is simply not a fair way to approach issues like this. Consider as well that the US has built a society heavily based around personal car usage, towns and cities are built around it, jobs and education expect it of you. So you are born into a car-first society, but then given the ultimatum of tracking and monitoring or reduced freedom of movement.
      - helge9210 5y ago
        > potentially excluding people from driving Apparently here we have different understanding. Everyone by default is excluded from driving. Driving a vehicle is not a right, it is a privilege, granted only to those who are willing to receive training, are able to pass test and are ready to operate vehicle that conforms to regulations. If vehicle is not within regulations limit it may not leave private property.
        ehnto 5y ago
        I don't believe driving a vehicle is a right. I agree with you on all points in this comment. I do believe everyone should have equal opportunity to prove they can drive a road legal vehicle safely, and a they should be able to do that without the metrics of their journeys forever after being recorded by technology companies, and the safe operation of their car being decided by technology devices watching them drive. I think you just don't agree with that. Just imagine it. Machine learning algorithms deciding whether you're drunk or not, and stopping your car from moving if it thinks you are. What could possibly go wrong?