Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 295 posts

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#211

Post by kazinator »

elif wrote: post #204
kazinator wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the competitive reality of driving in congested, urban areas. Drivers who cut in can save a lot of time over the course of a commute. They disrupt traffic flows and delay everyone else. So efficient traffic flows have to be defended. > Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; Yes, and some drivers like, for instance, to pass around 25 other cars who are making the same…

The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.

> traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency.

Do they?

> You are effectively using aggressive driving

Not me, personally. (I ride a bicycle and use transit from time to time, and the occasional rental car on weekends and holidays: out of the vicious rush-hour traffic.)

Fact is, if you throw a blinker, there will be those drivers who will reduce gaps and not let you in. Usually not in merge situations (as in, you can't join this freeway, bugger off!) but situations in where the lane change is not necessary (you're not entitled to swerve into this lane just because it's moving faster!). I agree with them; they are doing the right thing. It can usually be done safely, within the "two second rule" for following another vehicle, depending on speed. Be it right or wrong, safe or unsafe, if you want to outwit those who are doing it, you have to do the wrong thing an not blink.

Not letting people join a freeway is despicable. (It happens too: "Hey, you can merge here ... just not in front of me, thank you very much!") The do-not-blink principle does not apply there, because it's obvious that you want to merge whether you blink or not, being in a merging lane and all! My comments don't apply to that situation at all.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#212

Post by eru »

jklowden wrote: post #94
ben1040 wrote: post #27

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you…

Free-market ideology if you ask me. The first sentence suggests the hapless government wants to spent $4 billion on research for something you you can have today for $20K. A little later it mentions Washington's "time and billions" spent on fuel-efficiency instead of "saving lives". The government has also funded electric-car research and encouraged Detroit to build them. Contrasting self-driving with electric drive…

Oh, and efficiency saves lives in and off itself. (One possible path, using less oil for cars, we can use more oil instead of coal in other applications. Thus mining less coal. Coal mines are crazy dangerous per Joule mined comparatively.)

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#213

Post by MBCook »

rcthompson wrote: post #200
MBCook wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honda's system cuts out at some 'slow' speed like 35mph. If you don't do anything the car should fully stop but that's because you'll trigger the automatic emergency breaking. The problem with the system is it's relatively simplistic. You set a following distance (there are 4 options) and the car will never get closer to the car in front of you than you've specified. It will slow down as necessary to maintain that di…

It seems weird that it would need to brake at all most of the time to maintain a following distance. Unless the car in front of you suddenly brakes or you're going down a steep hill or something, wind resistance usually provides all the braking you need at highway speeds.

It's usually more an issue when someone is getting on/off the highway and isn't at a reasonable speed.

But that's kind of the issue. At times I think if the car just let off the gas earlier it wouldn't need to brake.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#214

Post by eru »

davidmr wrote: post #190
JonFish85 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cases like these, if a collision occurs, who is at fault? Presumably it is the "driver", especially in this case, right? But if/when this gets into the court system, when do people start going after the "self-driving" manufacturers, who have much, much deeper pockets than your average car owner.

To me (who, to be fair, has no experience in this area), it seems that the only long term solution to this liability issue is a government-funded and controlled fund accompanied by legal changes prohibiting these cases from going to "normal" court. For something that is a demonstrable way of saving huge numbers of lives, but still carries some risk, using the model of the vaccination side effect fund seems like a goo…

For complete self-driving cars, it's seems obvious that the manufacturer should be liable. And a lot of people want it that way:

- Google wants to be liable. - The passengers doesn't want to be liable. - Insurance companies would perhaps like to go after the entity with deeper pockets, too?

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#215

Post by plg »

ben1040 wrote: post #27

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you…

To me this sounds horribly unsafe. You are lulled into this state where you don't have to pay attention to steering UNLESS you have to pay attention to steering, and you will find this out suddenly. So if you always have to pay attention, even when the system is active, then what exactly is the point of the system in the first place? Wouldn't it be safer to always pay attention?

I guess this is an empirical question. Is it just as safe to (a) not pay attention until suddenly you have to pay attention, vs (b) pay attention all the time?

I suppose the sudden aspect of (a) is the dangerous part.

On the other hand the constant vigilance demand of (b) is also dangerous (we know people are bad at staying vigilant for long periods of time when a stimulus doesn't change much)

Does anyone know of any peer reviewed published work on this?

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#216

Post by eru »

jklowden wrote: post #94
ben1040 wrote: post #27

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you…

Free-market ideology if you ask me. The first sentence suggests the hapless government wants to spent $4 billion on research for something you you can have today for $20K. A little later it mentions Washington's "time and billions" spent on fuel-efficiency instead of "saving lives". The government has also funded electric-car research and encouraged Detroit to build them. Contrasting self-driving with electric drive…

Isn't that mostly a pro-business ideology?

(They overlap quite a bit. But eg business don't like competition, especially foreign competition. But competition exactly one of the reasons the market works well for society.)

I imagine a free-market ideologue could make a point like: the government shouldn't spend money on fuel-efficiency, just put a tax on emissions and let the market figure it out.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#217

Post by ghaff »

massysett wrote: post #176
libraryatnight wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just bought the 2016 Civic Touring last week and it came with this. It certainly seems to be getting ahead of things to say it's self-driving. Your description is accurate, it's more of a helper than truly autonomous. I will say I was concerned, because there was a Car and Driver review where they seemed to indicate it had issues thinking you were drifting and trying to correct when you were fine, but I haven't had…

I have the 2016 Accord with Sensing and occasionally the road departure mitigation system will freak out and warn you even where there is no drifting at all. At one point on my drive the pavement goes from asphalt to concrete and the lane markings lighten, and this fools it nearly every time. Overall, the whole system was worth it for the forward collision mitigation system alone. It can be a bit of a nanny but it ca…

I have to say that with respect to regular cruise control, I got out of the habit of using it years ago and don't remember the last time I tried it. I don't drive a lot of wide-open roads and even when I'm on rural interstates that are relatively low traffic, it's the case that I just got out of the habit.

I'm all for collision avoidance systems but, for the rest, I think I'd need to genuinely (and relatively safely) be able to take my attention off the road and do other tasks. Maybe decrease the amount of mental energy in stop and go but the big win is being able to do other things than actively drive.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#219

Post by kazinator »

elif wrote: post #150
kazinator wrote: post #15

Americans could rather use a robot highway driving instructor. "Consider moving over to the right line; you're driving at the speed limit, and a speeding car is approaching; you may confirm this in the rear-view mirror." "I have detected that you came to a full stop at the end of a generous freeway entrance ramp in light traffic. Suggested future action: look over the shoulder as early as possible and match the speed…

My reaction is the complete opposite. I see people buying these $20k safe cars for their teenage children, who will be 1) less skilled as drivers 2) feel empowered to push the limits of impaired driving

But, on the other hand, teenage children getting $20K cars will always fall into the problem category of ... teenage children getting $20K cars.

Even if a trend breaks out whereby cars with self-driving abilities are chosen by parents who are gifting their spoiled offspring with new automobiles, that trend is temporary; eventually the capability will become commonplace, like ABS and air bags. Teenagers will then be getting their licenses using such cars, whether or not their parents are spoiling them with new cars.

Eventually, even relatively poor teenagers will be learning to drive and taking their road tests on 25-year-old third-hand beaters which have still-working self-driving functions.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#220

Post by mikeash »

Shivetya wrote: post #210
mikeash wrote: post #31

The article really wants to compare with electric vehicles, for some reason. The subheading says "they are being snapped up faster than electrified vehicles." This is repeated in the article, which says the relevant options packages "are being snapped up at a far higher rate than electrified vehicles." Discussing the Q50's technology package and how many buyers opt for it, it says "That’s three times as many people w…

The interest in self driving cars is much higher than in EVs for the general population. EVs even with two hundred mile range models coming out; I hope to get a lease on a Bolt by next Spring; will still have more limitations than people will accept. Even if the limitations aren't that burdensome it will take time for people to understand that. Still they will see 200 mile range and half hour or more charging versus…

I agree with all that. But what's the link? I mean, interest in self driving cars is much greater than interest in plastic flowers, but it wouldn't make any sense to compare the two in an article.
Post reply on HN