3 ms·

A question about the Cybertruck's "5 star safety rating" from the NHTSA. I don't think many people have an issue with the Cybertruck keeping its occupants safe

A question about the Cybertruck's "5 star safety rating" from the NHTSA. I don't think many people have an issue with the Cybertruck keeping its occupants safe in a crash (or, at least, that's not the concern I've heard), it's about the potential dangers to pedestrians and other road users. I think the Cybertruck looks pretty massive, and I live in Texas where giant trucks are the norm. In the UK it must look like a tank, relatively. From what I can tell, it doesn't look like the NHTSA safety ratings take potential dangers to non-occupants into account. Am I correct in this understanding? If so, that seems like a giant mistake. In the US it feels cars and trucks have just gotten bigger and bigger, and one reason is that for any individual, a bigger car is safer. But when everyone drives giant vehicles, safety is much worse for everyone, because you just have overall much more kinetic energy zipping around the highways.

cratermoon 2y ago
Like much of US automobile culture, the emphasis on what's best for the cars and their occupants. Yes, the NHTSA ratings are heavily tilted towards the safety of occupants of the vehicle. Highway and road design are also skewed towards the best outcome for the automobile. Think of it like a trolley problem where the ideal result is the least damage to the trolley and harm to its occupants. A relatively new term has come into use, though: Vulnerable Road Users. The current state of automobile and road safety has drastically reduced the number and severity of injured and killed automobile occupants. What's continued to rise is the numbers of pedestrians, cyclists, people using wheelchairs and mobility devices, and even people who work alongside automobile infrastructure. The lack of concern for anyone outside of a motor vehicle is part of why driverless cars have been licensed despite well-publicized incidents involving these vehicles, e.g. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-gets-millions-after-getting-dragged-by-self-driving-taxi-in-san-francisco https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-ge...
xnx 2y ago
Then NHTSA doesn't even test crashes between different sized vehicles because this would expose how much safer for the occupants it is to be in a larger, higher, more massive vehicle.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  > would expose how much safer for the occupants it is to be in a larger, higher, more massive vehicle. Interesting that you phrase it that way - yes, it's safer for the occupants in the more massive vehicle, and consequently much more dangerous and destructive for those in smaller vehicles. My primary point is that this "race to larger vehicles" is classic Tragedy of the Commons: "A social problem in which each individual is incentivized to act in a way that is ultimately harmful to all individuals."
  - xnx 2y ago
    Yes. I understand and agree. The NHTSA doesn't do this testing because it would hypercharge his arms race and expose how being poor on the road (smaller and older car) is much more dangerous.

cratermoon 2y ago

Like much of US automobile culture, the emphasis on what's best for the cars and their occupants. Yes, the NHTSA ratings are heavily tilted towards the safety of occupants of the vehicle. Highway and road design are also skewed towards the best outcome for the automobile. Think of it like a trolley problem where the ideal result is the least damage to the trolley and harm to its occupants. A relatively new term has come into use, though: Vulnerable Road Users. The current state of automobile and road safety has drastically reduced the number and severity of injured and killed automobile occupants. What's continued to rise is the numbers of pedestrians, cyclists, people using wheelchairs and mobility devices, and even people who work alongside automobile infrastructure. The lack of concern for anyone outside of a motor vehicle is part of why driverless cars have been licensed despite well-publicized incidents involving these vehicles, e.g. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-gets-millions-after-getting-dragged-by-self-driving-taxi-in-san-francisco https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-ge...

xnx 2y ago

Then NHTSA doesn't even test crashes between different sized vehicles because this would expose how much safer for the occupants it is to be in a larger, higher, more massive vehicle.

hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
> would expose how much safer for the occupants it is to be in a larger, higher, more massive vehicle. Interesting that you phrase it that way - yes, it's safer for the occupants in the more massive vehicle, and consequently much more dangerous and destructive for those in smaller vehicles. My primary point is that this "race to larger vehicles" is classic Tragedy of the Commons: "A social problem in which each individual is incentivized to act in a way that is ultimately harmful to all individuals."
- xnx 2y ago
  Yes. I understand and agree. The NHTSA doesn't do this testing because it would hypercharge his arms race and expose how being poor on the road (smaller and older car) is much more dangerous.