Live data from Hacker News

The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

scobleizer.com

121–130 of 142 posts

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#121
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not even remotely economical to eliminate bad drivers, not to mention good drivers who driver badly at times. My sense is that during any test, people will appear much better drivers than they are on average, since they won't be drunk or shooting off an SMS message or whatever else. It is economical to save a lot of lives with technology. This is a good tech. I don't know if I'd go with most important since seat…

It's an incentive for people to pay less attention when driving. It's a bad incentive IMHO.

You could make the exact same silly argument about seat belts, crumple zones, and air bags, but the fact is all 3 save many lives.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#122
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure they are getting a lot from Mazda. The Ford Fusion, for example, is basically a rebadged Mazda 6.

I wonder how it works - Ford own Volvo, who are pretty good with safety features (e.g. the 3 point seatbelt) and who have been building blind-spot awareness systems, brake-priming systems, etc. and their concept for the next S60 had distance-to-car-in-front cruise control and pedestrian detection and so on. ( http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm?md=1468 ) Maybe Ford are getting it from Volvo?

Maybe. Technology sharing is a big reason for a lot of these deals. For example the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger uses a lot of Mercedes-Benz suspension components (though Daimler has since sold off their interest in Chrysler).

Incidentally, Ford has recently entered an agreement to sell Volvo to a Chinese manufacturer.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/dec/23/volvo-sale-ch...

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I could see this becoming a problem in the future. Imagine getting used to this, then for some reason, needing to drive an older car. "Oops, I didn't realize this car required manual braking".

There could be two classes of license, like in Japan where you can have a limited qualification to drive only automatics, or a full license including manuals too. In this case, however, the "automatic" would be the fully automated vehicle, and the "manual" would be the traditional human-controlled one.

why would you need a license for a fully automated vehicle?

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#124

Just to put in context, a link that was here last week or so about the Automation Paradox: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/automated-to-dea... Will there be a compromise between traditional crash deaths and safety systems induced deaths ? Not to dismiss the new systems, I'm an optimistic by nature.

How is it not still a net win? The automated systems fail a lot less often than humans. Even if they can't get the failure rate to 0%, it is still making things safer to replace humans by robots.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#125
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There could be two classes of license, like in Japan where you can have a limited qualification to drive only automatics, or a full license including manuals too. In this case, however, the "automatic" would be the fully automated vehicle, and the "manual" would be the traditional human-controlled one.

why would you need a license for a fully automated vehicle?

The real reason for drivers licenses is social control. My father's first driver's license was never supposed to expire, my State ID was never supposed to expire, in both they changed the rules, and forced stores and banks to no longer accept "expired" IDs as proof of identity. It's not like your identity or age or ability to drive or anything else changes when your ID expires, they just want to keep you on their chain.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#126
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My drivers education course (in the US) emphasized steering to avoid a collision first, and then braking afterwards. We were taught that colliding with a pole at 35 mph is better than doing so with oncoming traffic for a total effect of 70 mph. It also reduces the chances of injury. After reading that pilots are the safest drivers, I've made sure to always look around my car as I drive.

Remember that F = ma. Hitting another car of the same size coming from the opposite side when each car is doing 35 mph is pretty similar to hitting a concrete wall at 35 mph. There is no 70 mph effect. The reason the pole would be safer is that it has some give. Lower acceleration = lower force.

If someone could explain why I was voted down, that would be great. Thanks.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#127

GPS-enabled Governors should be put in all cars too, limiting your speed to that of the speed limit, adjusted for weather conditions. If you're in a 35 MPH zone, you car will stop accelerating (and ideally auto-slow when going downhill or onto slower roads) once you hit the limit for that part of the road. Speed limits would likely have to be re-adjusted in some cases as they may be too low in some area's, but it wou…

How about we put a GPS-enabled governor around your neck, in case you ever think of stepping on private property.

Different context which doesn't apply to my initial post, and worded in a harsh manner to attempt to demonize my idea without presenting an argument against its merits (i.e. "around your neck"), but I'll bite.

Stepping on an individual's property doesn't endanger others' lives needlessly. It's pretty easy to call the police and have a trespasser removed/arrested. Plus, in some states, you can shoot and kill trespassers so long as you've given them fair warning, and can legally carry a firearm. People also have attack dogs, surveillance systems, etc...

You can't shoot and kill someone who's speeding endangering your life. If you call the police about a speeder, they'll usually look for them if they're not too busy. But police departments would quickly be overwhelmed if they had to police "every" speeder on the road. There's simply not enough police. Also, you're defenseless while being in the presence of their illegal driving behavior.

Trespassing, on the other hand, is a rare occurrence. Penalties tend to be harsher than speeding (jail time rather than a fine). It must be much easier to speed than trespass since I don't know anyone I've met in the last year who hasn't sped, yet I can't pick a single trespasser out of any of them. I'd imagine this is the same for most people.

People have little incentive to trespass too. Why do it? To steal something? Murder? Most people don't need to steal things or kill others.

Speeding, on the other hand, has a number of incentives tied to it which provide immediate benefit without significant perceived risk (tickets are rare - habitual speeders may only receive a couple a year | accidents are even rarer). For one, it might save you time^. It also makes people feel good (release of aggression, showing off, feeling of freedom, etc...).

My initial idea isn't one of punishment, but one which increases safety. What's the goal of driving? Going from A to B in a safe, efficient manner. Why wouldn't you want it to be safer, within reason? So you can cut 4 minutes off your 60 minutes of travel time?

^This isn't always the case. Roadways are much like assembly lines. Their slowest points set the pace of everything on the line. Speeders mostly zip from one bottleneck to the next, never really decreasing their net travel time. Time yourself driving the speed limit to work and back one day, and time yourself speeding the next. How much time did you save? A minute or two? None at all?

NOTE: Most vehicles already have governors which limit their top speeds, though aren't used in the manner which I suggest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_(device)

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#128
post #45
post #39

I don't buy it. If you need a radar to tell you you're about to crash, you're probably not paying attention properly. We should tighten up driving tests. Driving shouldn't be a right, it should be something only competent attentive people can do. It'd be interesting to know stats on Manual vs Automatic car accident rates. I'd guess that Automatics are involved in more accidents since the drivers are probably paying l…

If somebody cuts you off, the radar is guaranteed to have a faster reaction time than you.

The point someone made up thread, is that unlike the radar, if you are paying attention, you will likely notice them approaching to cut you off which the radar certainly cannot.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#129
post #93

Here's the reason I expect to hate this "feature": I already hate the way my seat belts work and they have nearly gotten me into multiple accidents. Specifically, if I see a hazard coming from the sides/rear and slow down and try to avoid them, I need to be able to turn my head quickly and sharply to see them. And the GODDAMN SEATBELT IS PREVENTING THIS because the slowdown and my quick sitting-up-straight has caused…

How many years of driving experience do you have? I only ask because this sounds so much like something a new driver would say.

Your car is not a finely tuned Formula 1 Ferrari. It shouldn't be driven like one.

Re: The most under-hyped, but most important, technology since seat belts

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DARPA challenge was five years ago! This is the result of advances made in those challenges. The Stanford guys have advanced so much that they'll take it on a rally track this year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CuVVZq9GfY

erm...the urban challenge was 2007.

The first DARPA challenge was in 2004. In 2005 and 2007 most of the teams easily completed the challenge so the problem is definitely 'solved' now. There's no more prize money anymore. Its over! The tech is here now.
Post reply on HN