81–90 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If we can save one life, it's worth it" is part of the reason everything is so expensive in the US. People forget that poverty is also deadly and don't factor that into the calculation.
I'd argue that profit margins are more to blame here.
Having driven a vehicle with automatic braking, I find myself experiencing no positive feelings about this proposal.
> Having driven a vehicle with automatic braking, I find myself experiencing no positive feelings about this proposal. This post seems useful. As in - there are really important experiences behind it that we should know about. Or better yet, experiences that lawmakers should know about. Or worse yet, experiences do know about and disregard because it's an election year.
One time, I was taken over by a car, and the car suddenly hits the breaks. Same thing there: it breaks harder on the right side, so it feels like it's pulling onto the shoulder.
It made me feel really uncomfortable with the car. Sure, it was a narrow road and passing, but as a human I never had a problem with the distances.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went to Japan and know how it is there. I'm also from a farm, I'm quite familiar with farming efficiency and I'm not aware of anything big happened in the last 20 years which reflects any real growth. Germany didn't get more land in the last 20 years. And I myself as a software engineer probably added to the growth of the bip in Germany. If you are not even able to bring your point across, why do you believe so str…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry but your comment makes no sense.
I think the person is saying there may be a vast difference between what's marketed and promised, and how projects like these have historically under-delivered or failed.
Why are people commenting on Hacker News so negative? This is a progressive, good idea. It will save 24,000 injuries a year. I think if Hacker News was around when seat-belts were invented there would be some looney tunes claiming it's an abuse of first amendment rights or some rubbish. The next thing should be mandatory lane keeping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am very skeptical of the claim. A driver glance down to change the station, going 110 kms, with less than 15 meters and the car in front of you full stop breaks, you are going to crash, but yet folks still continue to do it and still they believe they'd be able to stop in time even with all the experience of driving. I don't believe most drivers today would be able to pass the present driver test successfully the f…
You are also atill going to crash if you break automatically in that scenario... i dont get your point
You may avoid whatever the first person was trying to avoid hitting or spinning into the next lain etc.
All this technology has the effect of pushing up the cost of vehicles, often for questionable minor safety improvements. Is there a good analysis of why the road safety trend has gone the wrong way in the US lately?
We do it for electric bicycles and scooters. Why not cars?
Why are people commenting on Hacker News so negative? This is a progressive, good idea. It will save 24,000 injuries a year. I think if Hacker News was around when seat-belts were invented there would be some looney tunes claiming it's an abuse of first amendment rights or some rubbish. The next thing should be mandatory lane keeping.
There is one safety feature that would universally make cars safer and not require radar or computers. Just simple speed governors based on geo-fencing and radio speed limit signs. It would be trivially easy to install on existing vehicles and much less expensive on new vehicles. In addition it would increase pedestrian safety by leaps and bounds. We do it for electric bicycles and scooters. Why not cars?
If you read any articles on the subject, you can almost feel the author resisting the urge to say that outright.