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

Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 512 posts

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#101

Post by pdonis »

taeric wrote: post #27
version_five wrote: post #2

Regulatory capture marches forward. In an environment where small, cheap, runabout electric vehicles could become very popular, I expect lots of "for your safety" reasons why cars have to be complicated and expensive.

I mean, I can certainly agree that there is a thing as regulatory capture. I am not clear that this is it, though. Making cars safer has legit improved life expectancy. Anti-lock brakes, seat belts, rear view cameras, blind spot indicators, etc. are all very welcome advances that make modern vehicles much more safe than they would otherwise be.

All of the safety devices you mention were bought by many consumers before they were required by regulations. Why? Because they are obvious benefits with no real downside. In fact, the only reason regulators were able to require things like anti-lock brakes and seat belts on all cars was that the vast majority of cars already had them, because the vast majority of drivers already recognized their benefits. They didn't need regulators to tell them.

The systems under discussion here are different, because they have the capability to do something that none of the other safety systems you mention can: take control of your car from you. Anti-lock brakes only work when you press the brake pedal. Seat belts and rear view cameras are passive. Automatic systems that can press the brakes without warning and without you expecting it are very different; what if the system makes a mistake? Multiple other posters in this thread have described such mistakes.

These systems are more like rudimentary self-driving cars and should be judged accordingly. They are not just passive safety features with no downside.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#103

Post by pmarreck »

ics wrote: post #50
jacquesm wrote: post #6

This almost got me into a serious accident, twice. Definitely would not recommend and I switched cars because of it. The last thing I need is buggy software with the capability of instantly changing the trajectory of my vehicle (slippery surfaces, cornering). A brand car as well (MB) so really, really disappointed, what should have been a safety feature actually was the opposite. Dealer said everything was fine so th…

I wrote up a long comment that got scrapped by my focus filter but I feel the need to voice strong agreement here. I have a recent Mazda which in almost all ways is my perfect car except for the newfangled safety features all new cars seem to have. Lane correction and emergency braking, even set to the lowest sensitivity levels, are bad to outright dangerous in city (and some country) driving. In NYC it's common to h…

The B in AEB stands for “braking”, not “steering”, so I don’t understand what system you’re referring to that would steer into cyclist traffic

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#104

Post by hedora »

lsaferite wrote: post #48
karaterobot wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the person you were responding to, but here's an anecdatum: One time I was driving behind someone under otherwise normal conditions, and they turned right into a parking lot. As they turned right, they obviously began exiting the road. The screen on my car screamed "BRAKE!" and then the braking system activated. They were about 60% of the way into the parking lot, and continuing to exit. I was at a normal followi…

I fully understand that frustration, but I would point out that continuing through the departure zone like that at full speed is prone to accidents with another car entering the road in that blind spot and you should adjust accordingly. Additionally, following the car in front of you so close that you hit them if they brake suddenly is inherently dangerous and a bad habit as well. Interestingly enough, a universal AE…

Road throughput is inversely proportional to following distance, so if everyone doubles their following distance to account for / avoid spurious automatic emergency braking, then we’d need to double the number of lanes to keep road capacity constant, which would lead to more lane changes, and therefore accidents.

If, instead, we kept the roads the same, then congestion would increase, and with it, accidents.

There is a reason that random unexpected emergency braking is a favorite tactic for people attempting to force accidents in order to commit insurance fraud: It’s too expensive for everyone to change their habits in order to guard against it.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#105

Post by ceejayoz »

pdonis wrote: post #101
taeric wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I can certainly agree that there is a thing as regulatory capture. I am not clear that this is it, though. Making cars safer has legit improved life expectancy. Anti-lock brakes, seat belts, rear view cameras, blind spot indicators, etc. are all very welcome advances that make modern vehicles much more safe than they would otherwise be.

All of the safety devices you mention were bought by many consumers before they were required by regulations. Why? Because they are obvious benefits with no real downside. In fact, the only reason regulators were able to require things like anti-lock brakes and seat belts on all cars was that the vast majority of cars already had them, because the vast majority of drivers already recognized their benefits. They didn'…

The car industry fought seatbelts and airbags.

https://www.nytimes.com/1975/04/06/archives/industry-resists...

Your claims about widespread voluntary adoption appear false.

https://www.history.com/news/seat-belt-laws-resistance

> At the time, only 14 percent of Americans regularly wore seat belts, even though the federal government required lap and shoulder belts in all new cars starting in 1968.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#106

Post by toast0 »

pmarreck wrote: post #103
ics wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote up a long comment that got scrapped by my focus filter but I feel the need to voice strong agreement here. I have a recent Mazda which in almost all ways is my perfect car except for the newfangled safety features all new cars seem to have. Lane correction and emergency braking, even set to the lowest sensitivity levels, are bad to outright dangerous in city (and some country) driving. In NYC it's common to h…

The B in AEB stands for “braking”, not “steering”, so I don’t understand what system you’re referring to that would steer into cyclist traffic

Lane keeping assistance, from the context.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#107

Post by aziaziazi »

ghostpepper wrote: post #86
randomfinn wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> braking much harder than I would have been able to Any idea why you weren't able to apply full brakes? I remember reading that most people don't in an emergency and that's why the emergency brake boost was created, but haven't seen the reason for it.

Maybe people who learned to drive on pre-ABS cars?

I can remember clearly my thoughts during before bumping into someone in front of me: it was quick alternates between “BREAK NOW” and “beware slipping”. Traffic was quite slow but but I was terrified to not being able to choose what voice to listen in my head, it was a very strange dissonance experience.

I braked too softly and ended up in the bumper of the car in front of me. The rental car did had ABS and I knew it but didn’t thought of it during the breaking.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#108

Post by 1_1xdev1 »

diggernet wrote: post #70
jacquesm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually you can disable it but on a per-ride basis and it takes a lot of menu scrolling and tapping to do it again. It defaults to 'on' when you start the car, and there is no physical switch to disable it permanently.

I imagine there is no permanent disable because it is a "safety" feature. But at least on my Subaru disabling it is a physical button. No scrolling and tapping required. On the other hand, it also works well enough that I haven't felt a need to disable it.

On my 21 Subaru I disable lane assist unless I’m on the highway. It’s too strong on the wheel, and there are too many construction related lane issues near me that have almost caused accidents for me multiple times.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#109

Post by Tanoc »

jacquesm wrote: post #57
r00t4ccess wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the poster Vw golf r 2016 the sensor was low to the ground and it would randomly brake for stuff it thought was a threat like a cardboard box. Subaru crosstrek 2018 - would brake for no reason, cars turning up ahead of me, etc. VW atlas 2019 - brake for no reason would also scream at me and show a red symbol on the hud when nothing was in the road in front of me. Subaru impreza 2023 - brakes for turning vehicles…

Why not get a car without that stuff?

That's becoming increasingly harder as EuroNCAP mandates more and more of these as standard technologies that must be included. Manufacturers would much rather build one car and modify it as little as possible for all intended markets. So they design them with American and Chinese expectations for size, appearance, and features, and with European expectations for safety and emissions systems. We already can't buy new cars without rear cameras or forward emergency warning for that very reason.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#110

Post by dmead »

jacquesm wrote: post #6

This almost got me into a serious accident, twice. Definitely would not recommend and I switched cars because of it. The last thing I need is buggy software with the capability of instantly changing the trajectory of my vehicle (slippery surfaces, cornering). A brand car as well (MB) so really, really disappointed, what should have been a safety feature actually was the opposite. Dealer said everything was fine so th…

I just had to junk my 18 year old Buick sedan. Everything sucks now. Even mid range cars reek of the electronics being obsolete or broken in 5 years.
Post reply on HN