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

141–150 of 181 posts

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

#141

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

lesuorac wrote: post #104
acdha wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d also add https://www.ghsa.org/resources/news-releases/pedestrians-pre... > A combination of factors creates this deadly situation for people walking on U.S. roadways. A steep drop in traffic enforcement across the country since 2020 has enabled dangerous driving behaviors – including speeding and driving impaired – to flourish. At the same time, roads are largely designed to prioritize fast-moving vehicle traffic…

> I think the pause on enforcement a lot of police departments did after the George Floyd protests is a contributing factor to that first point Which is always a silly thing to read. George Floyd wasn't arrested because he flying 60 mph through red lights. It was over an alleged crime with maximum damages of $20; it's not even comparable to the violations being let slide.

The protests merely wanted police accountability, and police didn't like that and started just refusing to do their job.

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

#142

Post by bsza »

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?

Edge cases like medical emergencies, natural disasters, terrorist attacks etc., where speeding can actually save lives. You can’t account for all of those in an automated system.

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

#143

Post by acdha »

lesuorac wrote: post #104
acdha wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d also add https://www.ghsa.org/resources/news-releases/pedestrians-pre... > A combination of factors creates this deadly situation for people walking on U.S. roadways. A steep drop in traffic enforcement across the country since 2020 has enabled dangerous driving behaviors – including speeding and driving impaired – to flourish. At the same time, roads are largely designed to prioritize fast-moving vehicle traffic…

> I think the pause on enforcement a lot of police departments did after the George Floyd protests is a contributing factor to that first point Which is always a silly thing to read. George Floyd wasn't arrested because he flying 60 mph through red lights. It was over an alleged crime with maximum damages of $20; it's not even comparable to the violations being let slide.

It’s really frustrating to see those conflated. The fake plate guys are effectively going around with a big sign indicating premeditated intent to break safety laws. Floyd may or may not have even used a counterfeit bill but even in the case where he knowingly did, it wouldn’t have harmed anyone.

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

#144

Post by spankalee »

nomel wrote: post #123
spankalee wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pushing up the cost of cars is good. They're damaging to the environment, people, and our infrastructure. The minimum we can be doing right now is to lower the safety risk and emissions of them.

Where I am, my car commute is 30 minutes. If I moved closer, shaving it to 10 minutes, my housing costs double. If I get down to 5, housing costs are about 4x. If I use public transport now, the travel time is 2 hours. To keep my public transport to 30 minutes, I have to ~2x my housing costs. I think, realistically, people will just end up commuting further, to offset the cost, since that is the best financial, and t…

We should also build more housing!

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

#145

Post by spankalee »

grobbyy wrote: post #109
spankalee wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pushing up the cost of cars is good. They're damaging to the environment, people, and our infrastructure. The minimum we can be doing right now is to lower the safety risk and emissions of them.

No. It's not. Pushing down car ownership might be good, but not based on wealth. Priority should go to elderly, people with disabilities, people with kids, etc. Even so, the goal shouldn't be fewer cars but less miles driven. The kind of antagonistic approach you prescribe rarely leads to good policy.

Cars are massively subsidized, and requiring that they be safer reduces some of their externalities a bit, raising their cost and lowering that subsidy. That's a good thing.

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

#146

Post by willcipriano »

Veserv wrote: post #103
willcipriano wrote: post #68

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.

The article says it will save a estimated 362 lives per year at a cost of 82$ per car or 354 M$/yr. The actuarial value of a human life is usually around 5 M$, so that is a societal ROI of 5 if we only count fatalitys.

Your model assumes a even distribution of funds across society.

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

#147

Post by throwworhtthrow »

hroa wrote: post #132

We have a 2017 Highlander, and the automatic emergency breaking has avoided accidents at least 3 times. One time, my wife was at an intersection turning right. She was looking left for an opening, and a teenager saw the same opening and tried to run across the street as she accelerated into the right turn. The automatic breaking saved him and my wife from a sad situation.

That's horrific. You would hit another car or person every two years if not for automatic braking?

Also, it's inexcusable to turn in front of a pedestrian without even looking where you're going. I know it's common driving behavior but it's simply selfish to endanger someone on foot because you want to squeeze into cross traffic ASAP.

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

#148

Post by [deleted] »

foxyv wrote: post #110
lesuorac wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Most rental scooters are geo-fenced so people don't zip around walking paths at 20+mph. Edit: Here is a quick link https://www.li.me/blog/lime-introduces-new-geofencing-techno...

[deleted]

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

#149

Post by nomel »

spankalee wrote: post #144
nomel wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I am, my car commute is 30 minutes. If I moved closer, shaving it to 10 minutes, my housing costs double. If I get down to 5, housing costs are about 4x. If I use public transport now, the travel time is 2 hours. To keep my public transport to 30 minutes, I have to ~2x my housing costs. I think, realistically, people will just end up commuting further, to offset the cost, since that is the best financial, and t…

We should also build more housing!

That's another significant problem. Any dense housing built near the city is, necessarily, corporate built, due to initial costs. The ability to own these units is disappearing [1], with much more profit being found by renting. This means that moving near a city is, almost always, a 100% loss, where you burn your housing cost every month, rather than building equity with something you can own some commute away. This adds significantly more cost to the short commute, if you plan on living in the same place for a while.

[1] https://www.ppic.org/blog/multi-unit-housing-is-becoming-mor...

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

#150

Post by flerchin »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #125
flerchin wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like when

Like when everyone else is speeding. If everyone is going 80 mph, then being the one driver actually obeying the 65 mph speed limit puts you and everyone around you in MORE danger. Would it be safer for everyone to be going 65 mph? Absolutely. I'm definitely not disputing that. But speed differential is more dangerous than speed itself. EDIT: To be more accurate, speed differential makes crashes more likely, but spee…

Without data, this reads like self justification for poor behavior.
Post reply on HN