Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say • Hacker News Board

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#211

Post by omginternets » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:26 AM UTC

taeric wrote: post #140

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with numbers is that they don't tell the whole story. I can easily imagine a scenario where it might prevent 25000 crashes a year that are caused because 5% of drivers are staring at their phones, have a high chance of rear-ending someone, and this software makes that far less likely. While also containing bugs causing 1000 crashes a year for the larger number of non-distracted drivers, resulting in a net…

No, that isn't a problem with numbers. That is a problem with letting your imagination run things. The scenarios and questions you ask are easy to explore in the data. If the number of crashes goes down, contrived scenarios don't really impact things. If they stay flat or go up, then you have to answer why. To emphasize, for your imagination here to be relevant, the number has to do one of those. If the number goes d…

The question is whether anyone is actually interrogating the data in that way, not whether it can be interrogated. Large data-driven institutions are notorious for taking a narrow view of things.

The problem is precisely a lack of imagination, or perhaps more accurately, critical thought.

The parent is precisely engaged in the kind of interrogation that is necessary. If you are aware or an analysis that bears on his questions, now would be the time to share it.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#212

Post by mhb » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:29 AM UTC

notatoad wrote: post #111

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…

this seems like the sort of thing that would be better measured with actual numbers, not just anecdotes from people on the internet. the NHTSA is a pretty cautious organization, and they like numbers. if they've studied it and found that automatic braking will prevent 24000 crashes and 360 deaths per year, i'd be inclined to believe them. having the car brake for me when i'm not expecting it sounds kind of scary to m…

And the actual numbers should include the opportunity cost (in lives saved or QALYs, if you like) of the increased price of vehicles with these systems. Could that money have been spent on smoke detectors or healthier food or ?

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#213

Post by sobriquet9 » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:32 AM UTC

hnick wrote: post #125

pdonis wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The other comments here make ‘automatic emergency braking’ sound like a really good idea That's because those other comments all assume that "automatic emergency braking" will only do exactly what it's supposed to do and will never make a mistake. But any sensible person knows that's not going to happen. These systems will make mistakes, and some of those mistakes will cause harm. So you can't just make a blanket c…

I think there is one other aspect to consider. Over here at least, generally if someone rear ends you it's always their fault. The law says they were not maintaining a safe following distance. So from the perspective of the manufacturer they would probably say such mistakes should not by themselves cause problems unless someone else is breaking the law, no different to a human tapping the brakes because they thought…

It's not only rear ending. The main road near my house has a sharp left turn with a sign on the side of the road. I occasionally get a BRAKE! warning there, probably because AEB mistakes that sign for a car in front of me. On a wet road, stepping on the brakes when the car is turning can easily result in understeer, which is particularly dangerous in that spot because of the large boulders nearby.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#214

Post by lettergram » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:36 AM UTC

This might be controversial, but I don’t want any automated systems. I want a mechanical car and I don’t trust government or tech. Particularly in the privacy space primarily.

I say this as someone who spends hrs a day on a computer building AI systems…

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#215

Post by Drunk_Engineer » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:37 AM UTC

teej wrote: post #189

Drunk_Engineer wrote: post #183

Risk Compensation theory predicts this technology will increase risky behavior by drivers. It has been well established that people adjust their behavior in response to perceived risk -- and if the car is going to handle the emergency braking it will cause more dangerous speeds and tailgating. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation

Theory is great. What has data shown?

Among other things, data showed mandatory helmet laws may have had a perverse impact on motorcycle fatalities: http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/motorcycle%2...

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#216

Post by midoridensha » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:37 AM UTC

solfox wrote: post #172

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…

My MB van also has similar serious issues with buggy auto-braking. Once, while driving head-on into a bright sun, it decided it was time to apply full brakes while driving highway speeds on a busy highway, in a vehicle with a GVWR of around 9,500 lbs. That wasn't fun and could have easily caused an accident involving multiple cars. My Tesla, which is probably the leader here, regularly makes mistakes - though never r…

>they really need to also mandate certain tests and features - plus OTA updates to recall any bugs

OTA updates for braking systems will result in hackers wreaking havoc. The security implications of this are enormous; it's like putting your country's nuclear reactors on the internet.

Updates should only be done in-person at the dealership, for free.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#217

Post by enkid » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:38 AM UTC

dabluecaboose wrote: post #173

maximinus_thrax wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but that means little compared to an individual who already drives safely without it. https://udayton.edu/blogs/erma/2022/06/lakewobegon.php My 'boomer' relatives refuse to wear a seatbelt, regardless of how many fines they've incurred, exactly because they already drive safely.

[flagged]

You don't know how statistics work.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#218

Post by maximinus_thrax » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:38 AM UTC

dabluecaboose wrote: post #173

maximinus_thrax wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but that means little compared to an individual who already drives safely without it. https://udayton.edu/blogs/erma/2022/06/lakewobegon.php My 'boomer' relatives refuse to wear a seatbelt, regardless of how many fines they've incurred, exactly because they already drive safely.

[flagged]

Same reason a considerable percentage of smokers die of old age instead of heart attacks or cancers. Doesn't mean it's a good idea to start smoking.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#219

Post by drivebycomment » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:38 AM UTC

akira2501 wrote: post #155

asoneth wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multi-ton vehicles capable of moving at highway speeds are dangerous and kill roughly a hundred people a day in the US[1]. So whether these changes are driven by regulatory capture or not it makes perfect sense to tightly regulate automobiles. Personally I think consumers should be free to decide things like seatbelt and airbag use but if they drive on public roadways they should not be allowed to make cost/benefit t…

The majority of people killed in crashes are impaired by alcohol or drugs or both. 1/6 of all fatalities are pedestrians, and another 1/6 are motorcycles, despite only being 1/10 of all registered vehicles. There are tons of modes in this data. Assessing all crash fatalities as some sort of "general" problem you can target misses this fact. The single greatest thing you could do to reduce fatalities is to eliminate d…

This comment is irrelevant to the discussion of the AEB, since, AEB doesn't prevent anyone else from working on eliminating drunk and impaired driving. If anything, AEB would help mitigate some of the impact from the drunk and impaired driving.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#220

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 1:38 AM UTC

loeg wrote: post #187

notatoad wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this seems like the sort of thing that would be better measured with actual numbers, not just anecdotes from people on the internet. the NHTSA is a pretty cautious organization, and they like numbers. if they've studied it and found that automatic braking will prevent 24000 crashes and 360 deaths per year, i'd be inclined to believe them. having the car brake for me when i'm not expecting it sounds kind of scary to m…

I agree, but... false positive automatic braking can cause severe injury, too, though. And I worry that that is just harder to measure.

The article says:

> A metanalysis in 2015 found a 38 percent decrease in collisions for vehicles that utilized such a system, for instance.

Barring massive fuckups in methodology, that should account for false positives that cause an accident. The number of non-collision severe injuries (are we theorizing folks get their head banged against something when it brakes heavily?) is likely to be pretty small versus that 38% stat.