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

U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 181 posts

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#91

Post by lesuorac »

foxyv wrote: post #88

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?

Judging by how my car shows a speed limit change from 55 to 25 as I go under bridges that could get real dangerous real fast if there's a poor implementation.

Aren't all the scooters just a flat 20/25 mph cap with no dynamic changing? I think drones are the things you're looking for where they avoid flying near airfields.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#92

Post by dymk »

foxyv wrote: post #88

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?

> not require radar or computers

> speed governors based on geo-fencing and radio speed limit signs

sounds like that requires computers

> We do it for electric bicycles and scooters

I've never seen a scooter nor e-bike for sale that includes such a feature. Unless you're talking about rental scooters, which doesn't make sense to compare an owned car against.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#93

Post by RIMR »

foxyv wrote: post #88

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?

The first thing I hear people argue against is their "freedom" to drive their car without the government telling them what they can and cannot do.

But you already don't have the freedom to drive as fast as you want, and the current enforcement system is to come face-to-face with a cop.

I, personally, would prefer a system where my car physically will not allow me to drive over the speed limit. The problem though is that it has to apply to everyone. If 90% of the cars on the road don't have governors, and your car does, when you merge onto a highway where everyone is driving 20mph over the limit, you'll be in real danger since your car won't let you drive with traffic.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#94

Post by xnx »

foxyv wrote: post #88

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?

I'd be happy with a top speed cap of 85 mph to start.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#95

Post by CivBase »

foxyv wrote: post #88

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?

Probably because public backlash would be insane. There is very little political or economic incentive to push something like that.

It's kind of like banning alcohol. Yeah, it's bad for us (individually and collectively) but most of the population does it anyways and we're used to it. Taking that away would cause massive outrage.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#96

Post by josefresco »

Too bad the existing systems suck: https://www.thedrive.com/news/most-small-suvs-are-bad-at-aut...

"The SUVs that participated in the test were the Subaru Forester, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Ford Escape, Mazda CX-5, Hyundai Tucson, Jeep Compass, Mitsubishi Outlander, Chevy Equinox, and the Volkswagen Taos. Of those ten SUVs only one (!) received the IIHS' "Good" rating—the Subaru Forester. After that, only two were rated as "Acceptable," the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4. The Ford, Hyundai, and Jeep were rated "Marginal," while the rest were sent home with "Poor" ratings and their heads hanging low."

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#99

Post by lesuorac »

ckdarby wrote: post #51
jajko wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this technology ain't mature in any way, 99% or 99,9% is simply not good enough to deploy anywhere en masse. Lane assists, braking, collision recognition - I've seen false positives, I've seen no reaction where there should be one. By far the safest driving for me is simply having experience and no assistants enabled, ever. I know this begs question how to get to that level, these flawed helpers can maybe statis…

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…

What was your driver's test like? Driving around an empty lot is super-duper easy to do; the hardest part is parallel parking (in a space large enough for a semi-truck) and keeping two hands on the wheel.

I haven't heard of any that are better than a pulse test.

I'm thoroughly disappointed that there isn't a simulator component where you actually get tested on scenarios were a car crash is almost forced.

Re: U.S. to require automatic emergency braking on new vehicles in 5 years

#100

Post by teeray »

matthewfelgate wrote: post #57

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.

It may save 24,000, but kill, say, 50,000 in new ways due to bugs.
Post reply on HN