C/D: Automatic braking becoming standard on more cars

[kevm14]

http://blog.caranddriver.com/braking-ne ... -standard/

We'll just keep evolving our way to the self-driving car.

And bonus: looking at your phone instead of the road? No problem!

[kevm14]

Sure the tech will improve, but these are real side-effects:

This will be interesting when we'll here about a monster pile-up because a car locked it's brakes because of a bird, dog or a piece of garbage on the road.

The video-based warning system on my 2014 vehicle is sometimes fooled by a pattern of high-contrast shadows when the morning sun hits a certain road at the right angle. I don't think I'd be thrilled if it slammed on the brakes instead of just beeping at me as it does now.

Best reply to these:

But that shouldn't be an issue because drivers behind are at a safe distance and giving their full attention to driving...

[kevm14]

I'm definitely in this camp:

The elephant in the room continues to be ignored! Piling on a bunch of "nanny systems" will not solve the problem of distracted driving! What's even worse is the automakers, for every "nanny" they give you, they come up with a new "toy" for you to play with while you're supposed to be focusing on the safe operation of your vehicle. I've been driving now for close to 50 years, and have yet to see any comprehensive changes toward the improvement of driver education. Over compensating bad or distracted drivers does not make for safe roads.

I'm also a firm believer in root cause solutions, not merely addressing symptoms.

[kevm14]

You are so right! Sorry to say this but Yanks are known to have very poor driver's education. This is reflected by statistics:
The US has 11.6 traffic fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants and 13.6 fatalities per 100,000 vehicles. The UK has 3.5 and 6.2, France has 4.9 and 8.5 and Germany has 4.3 and 6.9; you can put all the passive safety equipment you want, ultimately, it is driver's education that does it.

Yep.

And let me also be clear about something else: I would support somewhat draconian driver education and licensing laws (even a tiered system), if it provided a way out of a mandated self-driving future. The key word being mandated. If someone isn't ultimately paying attention, they are probably better off with an auto-pilot, as much as that ignores the point made above. But as I've been saying repeatedly, I am very worried that driving your own car will essentially be made illegal someday. Not sure when. We're probably decades away. Then again, the tech is rapidly improving and decreasing in cost...

[kevm14]

Fun (and probably correct) conspiracy theory, referring to the "gentleman's agreement" cited in the article:

They have all agreed to not under cut each other as they raise the price of a car again.

Definitely. Why else would they agree to anything?

[kevm14]

I'm 28.

ABS has saved my bacon more times than I care to count, and I will never buy a car that doesn't have it (unless its a classic that never had it to begin with, like, say, something from the muscle car era).

This? This isn't progress, its just coddling stupid people.

I agree. The ABS naysayers failed to understand that the system has the ability to control all 4 wheels, whereas even the best trained professional driver only has a single input device to the braking system (the brake pedal and, well, the e-brake I guess). On a prepared surface, it is entirely possible that a pro can out-brake ABS in a straight line. In any other condition? Doubt it. I will, however, make an exception for certain loose surfaces were older ABS systems didn't do that well. But even in those conditions, while ABS may not have stopped the car faster than locking up the tires, it DID allow the driver to retain steering control, which is sometimes far more important than simply stopping.

The point is, the old arguments about ABS and seatbelts are not the same as arguing against these autonomous systems.