5 ms·
I'm baffled by this comment. For one thing, this is literally not how vehicle regulation has worked in any western country for at least half a century, probably
by AlotOfReading 3y ago
I'm baffled by this comment. For one thing, this is literally not how vehicle regulation has worked in any western country for at least half a century, probably longer. There are already legally mandated systems that take away driver control in certain circumstances, notably ABS.
For another, the NPRM being discussed assumes that essentially 100% of new vehicles will eventually come with AEB systems in the near future. The proposed rulemaking is just formalizing that situation and setting performance standards.
- mouse_ 3y agoABS does what I tell it I want to do, giving me greater control of the vehicle. When I press the brake all the way down, it means I want to stop as fast as possible, which I can't easily do without ABS. AEB does whatever it wants, without any input from me, leading to "surprises". ABS is user engaged, AEB takes control away from the user. Stop being disingenuous.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoHuh? ABS doesn't take away my control, it improves my control by preventing conditions that would reduce traction. This system is always engaged by brake pedal input from my foot. It's not something that cars just do out of nowhere. The emergency braking system will automatically stop the car without your input whenever it wants. Judging from this thread, that could be due to anything. False positives have been reported. People should absolutely be able to turn this thing off if they don't trust it.
- AlotOfReading 3y agoABS improves your control in normal circumstances. There are (uncommon) circumstances where it will actually harm your ability to handle the vehicle, same as other mandatory systems like ECS and optional safety features like traction control. Some vehicles have ways to disable some or all of these safety features for control purposes. The proposed rules include false activation tests, monitoring/reporting of unnecessary braking, and NHTSA retains the ability to order recalls if false activations are unreasonably common. It also includes a request for comment on whether manual disablement should be allowed at high speeds. Feel free to submit one if you feel strongly about it.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoCan you elaborate on that? Everything I've read about the ABS technology suggests it always improves steering and almost always reduces braking distance. Exceptions include surfaces like snow and gravel where it actually increases braking distances. If there's more to it than this, I could change my opinion on the matter: might be wise to have the option to disable in some situations.
- i_am_jl 3y ago> might be wise to have the option to disable in some situations Snow and gravel are the only valid situations where ABS can increase braking distance. However, disabling ABS is still a really poor idea. ABS increases braking distance in the snow because it allows the wheels to rotate so they can grip the road. ABS allowing your front wheels to rotate is why you have any marginal ability to steer and brake simultaneously. Without ABS in the snow your front wheels will lock while steering before your rears and you will lose control of the vehicle. On top of that, disabling ABS usually disables the vehicle's entire suite of driver aids like traction control and stability control which are extremely helpful in snow. I can't think of any situation, however contrived, where I would willingly disable ABS on a vehicle in snowy conditions... unless you were trying to slide a car around.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoI agree with you. I can't think of any situation I'd want to disable those systems either.
- AlotOfReading 3y agoAlso wet conditions, and worn concrete, etc. Worse, the control systems behind ABS systems are not equally effective at all speeds either, and typically have regimes where they introduce significant amounts of yaw oscillation during maneuvers. That's not good for the panicking driver and can result in them being unable to control the vehicle as effectively. Note that these are all very niche concerns and I think ABS is a fantastic safety feature, but it's still a compromise to improve the averages. This is true of virtually all safety technology.
- shortcake27 3y ago> People should absolutely be able to turn this thing off if they don't trust it. Absolutely not. There are other people on the road. Families. You don’t get to kill other people in a preventable accident because you believe you’re an above-average human who can outperform a computer.
- PM_me_your_math 3y agoComputer errors have killed entire families.
- Timon3 3y agoHuman errors have killed many, many, many more.
- o_1 3y agoIt should be optional period. You want to save lives how about disable stolen cars, so joy ride Kias dont kill pregnant mothers. Imagine emergency braking a F-350 with a gooseneck and two tractors on it. Does not end well.
- Timon3 3y agoWhat if it being optional increases death statistics massively? Should we really be ideologically driven instead of relying on data and measurable effects?
- matheusmoreira 3y agoWhat if free will leads to wars, crimes, deaths? Surely the world would be safer if we sacrificed our humanity for security!
- Timon3 3y agoWe can easily pass a law requiring AEB in new cars. Can you explain the mechanism that would allow legislating free will? Or were you just looking for any counter example, no matter if it makes the least bit sense?