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

441–450 of 512 posts

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#441

Post by taeric »

omginternets wrote: post #428
taeric wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like sophistry to hinder progress. The OP is literally about studies done. Did you find problems with them? Or are you only imagining problems there could be?

The latter, which is why the actual studies would be most welcome. But more to the point, there is a track record of narrow interpretation of studies and missing of the big picture. It’s hardly sophistry, it’s critical thought.

Is there a track record for this specific organization? Or there are a lot of publicly known tech companies that have missed the big picture?

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#442

Post by taeric »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #284
taeric wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a cost benefit, if the number drops 38%, you are going to have to work to show it isn't worth it. What would the number have to be? Can they make the system even better by finding cases it didn't help? Almost certainly. Progress isn't a straight line, but increases are increases.

> In a cost benefit, if the number drops 38%, you are going to have to work to show it isn't worth it. What would the number have to be? Where did anyone say "isn't worth it"? The sentence I see is "The problem with numbers is that they don't tell the whole story." Though in a more general sense, if someone does invent a system that has strong average safety gains, but makes the majority of people less safe... that's…

Fair, if you are just pushing that we need to keep looking at the numbers and to be aware of some ways it can go bad, fine. I took the topic here to be that these studies were bad. In a known and showable way.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#443

Post by ChatGTP »

ceejayoz wrote: post #413
ChatGTP wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Little hard to respond to the snark but I’m just glad I was paying attention and not on the phone or else I might be dead. Cheers.

No snark, and every avoided accident is a good thing. Policy makers at the national level just have to weigh all the cases over individual anecdotal ones. This often means one person’s risk goes up while thousands of others’ goes down. Sometimes that’s hard to balance, but if the 38% reduction in crashes cited in the article is true, this particular decision seems fairly simple.

I suspect the real issue is people using phones while driving, I know of at least one person who is dead from this. I rear ended a car when I was in my early 20s while on the phone, I se people driving trucks in narrow streets while on the phone in my area.

I don't like enforcing things like this as a band aid, it's fine to try improve a situation, but let's be honest, many people who are involved in these accidents are doing something with their phone.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#444

Post by taeric »

darkerside wrote: post #406
taeric wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a cost benefit, if the number drops 38%, you are going to have to work to show it isn't worth it. What would the number have to be? Can they make the system even better by finding cases it didn't help? Almost certainly. Progress isn't a straight line, but increases are increases.

Respectfully, you're taking an extremely naive stance to a topic where others are trying to bring nuance. I think if you listen carefully, you'd learn something that will help you not just on this topic but in your life. Logical fallacies like the base rate fallacy are real, and they fool all of us frequently, myself included. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy

Bringing nuance is fine, but it is also an easy stalling tactic in progress. Clear improvements in safety are shown in the studies linked here. From an organization that has shown remarkable progress in safety over the years. And has been beset with such "nuance" since the beginning.

Literally the same arguments were and are made against seat belts. Often. And is why I am not too willing to give way here.

Now, if you are just saying, "I hope they keep their eyes on the data and are willing to keep improving," great. I agree. If you are trying to angle it that this is not a safety improvement, I will loudly disagree.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#445

Post by taeric »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #281
taeric wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, you are contriving bullshit to scare folks. And you didn't look at the studies. 38% decrease in accidents along with decrease in fatalities. In the data. For the worries you are sprouting, the data would have to look very different.

It's not "contriving bullshit" to give some examples of how a single average number could be misleading, clearly labeled as hypotheticals.

It is literally the definition of FUD here, though. These aren't things that have happened. And the data is ridiculously clear on progress. To paint these doubts is pretty much only to spread fear and uncertainty.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#446

Post by taeric »

aposticknit wrote: post #345
taeric wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, you are contriving bullshit to scare folks. And you didn't look at the studies. 38% decrease in accidents along with decrease in fatalities. In the data. For the worries you are sprouting, the data would have to look very different.

I think they have a great point though, accurate measurement of the types of incidents is just as important if not more than the total.

This conjures the fear that the agency in question is bad at this. Do you have evidence that they are? Can it happen? Yes. We could also have it so that no wrecks from minorities are counted, such that we are blind to how they are impacted. Would be terrible. No evidence that that has happened.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#447

Post by colpabar »

shortcake27 wrote: post #355
matheusmoreira wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? ABS doesn't take away my control, it improves my control by preventing conditions that would reduce traction. This system is always engaged by brake pedal input from my foot. It's not something that cars just do out of nowhere. The emergency braking system will automatically stop the car without your input whenever it wants. Judging from this thread, that could be due to anything. False positives have been repor…

> People should absolutely be able to turn this thing off if they don't trust it. Absolutely not. There are other people on the road. Families. You don’t get to kill other people in a preventable accident because you believe you’re an above-average human who can outperform a computer.

Think of the children?

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#448

Post by eyphka »

mmaurizi wrote: post #418
eyphka wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyundai has been having engine failures, would not recommend as experienced spontaneous engine failure on a less than year old car. Check consumer reports or source below. “In 2020, NHTSA announced civil penalties for the companies—totaling $210 million—for not recalling vehicles in a timely manner. In 2021, a whistleblower who provided NHTSA with information that led to those penalties was awarded $24 million, the a…

The Ioniq 5 is an EV, can't imagine the engine failures on their ICE cars will have any effects.

The engine failures are mostly for combustion, and have resulted in multiple deaths, including nearly my own.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#449

Post by ceejayoz »

ChatGTP wrote: post #443
ceejayoz wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No snark, and every avoided accident is a good thing. Policy makers at the national level just have to weigh all the cases over individual anecdotal ones. This often means one person’s risk goes up while thousands of others’ goes down. Sometimes that’s hard to balance, but if the 38% reduction in crashes cited in the article is true, this particular decision seems fairly simple.

I suspect the real issue is people using phones while driving, I know of at least one person who is dead from this. I rear ended a car when I was in my early 20s while on the phone, I se people driving trucks in narrow streets while on the phone in my area. I don't like enforcing things like this as a band aid, it's fine to try improve a situation, but let's be honest, many people who are involved in these accidents…

Sure. What we know, though, is "stop doing that" doesn't work. That's why aviation, highway safety, healthcare, tech postmortems, etc. have discovered that "please ask the human to stop doing human things" isn't the approach to take. Instead, we try to engineer away the opportunities for human error to kill people. (Quite successfully, in a lot of cases; as an example, aviation safety in the developed world is overall an incredible success story for regulators.)

People will continue to use their phones in their cars. That's a fact we have to accept.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#450

Post by taeric »

tpxl wrote: post #367
shortcake27 wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every person on the planet believes they’re an above average driver. No one thinks they need these types of safety features in their car because they’re a safe driver and the problem is every other driver. It terrifies me that people are so oblivious to their own flaws that they would willingly disable features such as AEB if they could. I’m extremely thankful for regulations that prevent such life-saving safety feat…

An average person has 3-4 car crashes in a lifetime. Having 1 minor accident in 40 years of driving is above average. The only time I ever came close to having a crash is when lane assist tried to drive in the dividers on a highway with construction going on, so lane assist is the first to go in a new car.

The average person also has their wrecks at the beginning and end of their driving. Having 1 while in late 50s to 60s isn't that unlikely, either. And sets you on the average track.
Post reply on HN