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

281–290 of 512 posts

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#281

Post by Dylan16807 »

taeric wrote: post #278
ramblenode wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The scenarios and questions you ask are easy to explore in the data. This sounds like the beginnings of the McNamara fallacy: that there is some abstract "data" where all the relevant variables can be explored to decide the best course of action. The reason it's a fallacy is that data is itself only a reflection of conscientious decisions about what to measure and how to measure, and these are invariably limited to…

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.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#282

Post by skykooler »

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…

I don't care if the law says the person who rear-ends me is technically at fault; I don't want to get rear-ended in the first place. If I can't control the driving of the car behind me, at least I'd like to be able to control my car to prevent the possibility of such a situation.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#283

Post by grepfru_it »

ics wrote: post #50
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…

I wrote up a long comment that got scrapped by my focus filter but I feel the need to voice strong agreement here. I have a recent Mazda which in almost all ways is my perfect car except for the newfangled safety features all new cars seem to have. Lane correction and emergency braking, even set to the lowest sensitivity levels, are bad to outright dangerous in city (and some country) driving. In NYC it's common to h…

>focus filter

I’m more interested in this

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#284

Post by Dylan16807 »

taeric wrote: post #279
Dylan16807 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not listening. The 38% number can be true and there can be particular groups that are hurt more than helped. Nobody is trying to "argue against" the 38% number.

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 a hard sell.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#285

Post by [deleted] »

hnick wrote: post #115
ics wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote up a long comment that got scrapped by my focus filter but I feel the need to voice strong agreement here. I have a recent Mazda which in almost all ways is my perfect car except for the newfangled safety features all new cars seem to have. Lane correction and emergency braking, even set to the lowest sensitivity levels, are bad to outright dangerous in city (and some country) driving. In NYC it's common to h…

My new car has lane keep assist and AEB and I haven't had these issues. From what I hear it's very much to do with a maker's implementation (mine is Hyundai, who for various reasons seems to have a bad reputation in North America but a good one in Australia). For the lane keep assist I feel a nudge but it's extremely easy to overcome just through a normal grip on the wheel - if I don't budge it won't move. It's been…

[deleted]

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#286

Post by ryandvm »

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…

Eh, that's great for you (according to you), but for the millions of folks that are driving around staring at their phones, I am beyond thankful for this technology.

I've been driving a Honda with the all the safety assists for several years and while it does do the occasional erroneous "you need to brake" pre-warning, I've never had it brake unnecessarily.

Anecdotes aside, I'm fairly certain automatic braking is a net reducer of accidents.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#287

Post by toast0 »

midoridensha wrote: post #206
toast0 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lane keeping assistance, from the context.

Lane-keeping should only be active with cruise control active. You shouldn't be using it in city traffic, ever.

My 2017 Pacifica (built in 2016) has lane keeping on by default without cruise control. I'm pretty happy with its light touch, so I wouldn't expect it to really move me out of the de facto lane into the lane it senses, but it could try. I'll manually turn it off for snowy roads, but otherwise let it do it's job of supervising in case the human screws up. Otoh, other vehicles may have a stronger correction, or my least favorite where they just beep a lot.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#288

Post by dabluecaboose »

ceejayoz wrote: post #269
dabluecaboose wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (He might even be statistically more likely to run into the car he’s not used to seeing on the usually empty road via the stop sign he usually blows right through. Who knows?) That's not how statistics work. Again, statistics mean little to the individual.

“You are statistically more likely to die prematurely and painfully if you eat polonium” sure matters to individuals who eat polonium. I don’t think you’re clear on the definition of “statistically”.

I don't think you are clear on the definition of statistically.

Citing things with >90% probability does not, actually, prove your weak point that "all statistical probabilities are individual certainties".

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#289

Post by giobox »

Reading this thread, I can't help but wonder if some folks are confusing phantom braking on radar-adaptive cruise (a really widespread issue and common trait of radar based cruise) with AEB (Automatic Emergency Braking) activation. In my experience the former is common and can feel scary at highway speed, but this is not the same thing as AEB, which is a separate system. My ford for example has AEB and no cruise control at all, and has never once misfired.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#290

Post by ics »

grepfru_it wrote: post #280
grugagag wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe also it depends on the type of traffic and local driving habits and what saves your life in one city or country could kill you in another. The thing is, I’d rather have it disabled and not save lives but also not take any by default. It will surely improve over time and if it becomes flawless sure, I’d take it. The thing is that I don’t wan’t to be beta testing with my life or my passengers lives. In cases wher…

Definitely. As a New Yorker now living in the Deep South, it’s night and day. All of those features are off (including traction control) in the northern cities. You need to be on your toes in nyc especially. But in the south? Not a single one of the original poster’s complaints are valid here with the exception of cars who cut you off and then speed away (no need to slam on the brakes, cruise control). Personally, th…

I'm familiar with NYC and North to South Carolina traffic. The only time I have had issues outside of the city was on a drive up to Montreal, where the lane assist misread the lane shift on potentially icy road. Wasn't happy about that one, but it was easy to overcome. I've never had an automatic braking incident outside of NYC that I can recall.
Post reply on HN