3 ms·
So-called "self-driving" systems, or the more-accurately-named lane-keeping and distance-keeping systems, may or may not be safer than human drivers driving equ
by pwinnski 4y ago
So-called "self-driving" systems, or the more-accurately-named lane-keeping and distance-keeping systems, may or may not be safer than human drivers driving equivalent cars, but they are much safer than alcohol-impaired drivers.
The idea of having to blow into a tube every time I start my car seems outrageous, of course, but so many deaths every year in the US are due to alcohol-impaired driving that I'd almost be willing to support it.
Of course, given that they're only calling for new cars to be so equipped, we'd be looking at a very long period of time in which people prone to driving under the influence would refuse to buy newer cars, justifying it by saying that the systems don't understand how their alcohol tolerance works.
- hoppyhoppy2 4y agoTo be clear: this article is about passive detection systems that use e.g. infrared and touch sensors; it's not the blow-in-a-tube kind of system a judge might order to be installed in the car of a habitual DUI driver.
- pwinnski 4y agoI missed that, thanks for the call-out. Now I'm curious about how well these systems work, whether they are able to tell the difference between someone inebriated and someone sick, etc. Making a note for a future rabbit hole.