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

451–460 of 512 posts

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#451

Post by i_am_jl »

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.

For what it's worth, I think you're misunderstanding the sentiment here.

The argument isn't that a human is better at avoiding accidents than an automated system, the argument is that, as an average human, I'm good enough and the marginal difference isn't worth the complexity and risk that the system introduces.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#452

Post by taeric »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #335
taeric wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that isn't a problem with numbers. That is a problem with letting your imagination run things. The scenarios and questions you ask are easy to explore in the data. If the number of crashes goes down, contrived scenarios don't really impact things. If they stay flat or go up, then you have to answer why. To emphasize, for your imagination here to be relevant, the number has to do one of those. If the number goes d…

The confusion here is that some people realize they aren't "average". That is, while some policy or another is good on the whole , it can also be bad for them personally. For them, the chance of a wreck can actually increase. You're demanding that they sacrifice themselves to save imbeciles who probably shouldn't be allowed to drive anyway. For such people, these policies suck. And it's strange that there are those t…

Anyone that frames this as a sacrifice is an entitled person. Same as folks that argued against seat belts.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#453

Post by mkmk »

jacquesm wrote: post #72
mkmk wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting! My recollection was that it was a non-explosive tensioner, but maybe I'm wrong. Thinking about explosive tensioners reminds me of an EOD tool I recently learned about – the rocket wrench. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11qa5LFB6zI [1:36]

There are spring loaded ones too but they're not as powerful or as fast. https://laughingsquid.com/a-slow-motion-video-of-a-pyrotechn...

Hm I think it was something else entirely. If I recall correctly, it felt like a motorized ratchet pulling me back in my seat.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#454

Post by i_am_jl »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #440
AlotOfReading wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ABS improves your control in normal circumstances . There are (uncommon) circumstances where it will actually harm your ability to handle the vehicle, same as other mandatory systems like ECS and optional safety features like traction control. Some vehicles have ways to disable some or all of these safety features for control purposes. The proposed rules include false activation tests, monitoring/reporting of unneces…

Can you elaborate on that? Everything I've read about the ABS technology suggests it always improves steering and almost always reduces braking distance. Exceptions include surfaces like snow and gravel where it actually increases braking distances. If there's more to it than this, I could change my opinion on the matter: might be wise to have the option to disable in some situations.

> might be wise to have the option to disable in some situations

Snow and gravel are the only valid situations where ABS can increase braking distance.

However, disabling ABS is still a really poor idea.

ABS increases braking distance in the snow because it allows the wheels to rotate so they can grip the road. ABS allowing your front wheels to rotate is why you have any marginal ability to steer and brake simultaneously. Without ABS in the snow your front wheels will lock while steering before your rears and you will lose control of the vehicle.

On top of that, disabling ABS usually disables the vehicle's entire suite of driver aids like traction control and stability control which are extremely helpful in snow.

I can't think of any situation, however contrived, where I would willingly disable ABS on a vehicle in snowy conditions... unless you were trying to slide a car around.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#455

Post by AlotOfReading »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #440
AlotOfReading wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ABS improves your control in normal circumstances . There are (uncommon) circumstances where it will actually harm your ability to handle the vehicle, same as other mandatory systems like ECS and optional safety features like traction control. Some vehicles have ways to disable some or all of these safety features for control purposes. The proposed rules include false activation tests, monitoring/reporting of unneces…

Can you elaborate on that? Everything I've read about the ABS technology suggests it always improves steering and almost always reduces braking distance. Exceptions include surfaces like snow and gravel where it actually increases braking distances. If there's more to it than this, I could change my opinion on the matter: might be wise to have the option to disable in some situations.

Also wet conditions, and worn concrete, etc. Worse, the control systems behind ABS systems are not equally effective at all speeds either, and typically have regimes where they introduce significant amounts of yaw oscillation during maneuvers. That's not good for the panicking driver and can result in them being unable to control the vehicle as effectively.

Note that these are all very niche concerns and I think ABS is a fantastic safety feature, but it's still a compromise to improve the averages. This is true of virtually all safety technology.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#456

Post by albrewer »

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 had mine (2018 VW Golf GTI) trigger when driving really fast on a very hilly road. Headed into a dip, the braking triggered at 70mph. Nearly gave me a heart attack.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#457

Post by pixl97 »

kovacs_ wrote: post #195
hnick wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Hyundai had a not so great reputation in the early 2000s in the US. In recent years however this opinion seems to have shifted. Been driving an Ioniq 5 2023 for a couple months now with no phantom/emergency braking issues. I'm not in love with the performance of the lane keep without being on an HDA2 marked highway. I have to fight it just enough for it to not be useful on certain well marked backroads. Considering t…

If you use single pedal mode watch out for your lack of brake lights

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YW7x9U5TQ

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#458

Post by rcktmrtn »

thomasjudge wrote: post #435

So in some ways it's hard to argue against new "safety" features; but on the other hand there is a cost to sprawling feature creep in cars (or software): increased complexity surface; increased failure modes; increased repair costs. How many sensors/computers are on new cars; 10 years out how many of them will start to fail/go flaky. Right now I apparently have an O2 sensor and a crankshaft position sensor failure on…

Yeah, well put. There are a lot of difficult to quantify cost for new features:

* monetary for the consumer (new features give manufactures an excuse to keep the price high) * environmental (because increased failure surface area causes consumers to need more repairs/upgrades) * safety (side airbags hurt visibility... Bigger cars are more dangerous ... generally safety features may make more people drive more dangerously [1]) * increased oligopoly (complex safety requirements stifle competition)

The problem isn't that there's no benefit, it's just that all of those "unintended" costs are actually boons to the manufacturers, so as long as they're calling the shots new features will just keep on rolling. Meanwhile, we just get more and more dependent on something that fewer and fewer really understand.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#459

Post by sebzim4500 »

eimrine wrote: post #438
sebzim4500 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why it should be monitored to ensure that the net result of the rollout is a reduction in accidents/fatalities/injuries/etc.

Your comment is very hard to disagree. But how are you going to test if there might be some interference of two changes? For example, negative effect from screen/touchscreen and positive from auto-breaking - isn't your next proposal to gather more information including video of driver's moves? I have a strong feel that an argument that the drivers must be video-streaming while moving will be equally hard to disagree.

Why should drivers be video streaming? I'm just suggesting that regulators should compare accident rates of cars with and without automated breaking. I'm not saying we should spy on anybody, surely regulators already get this data.

Re: Automatic emergency braking should become mandatory, feds say

#460

Post by JohnFen »

vkou wrote: post #121
JohnFen wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I also agree with this: > If the government wants to immediately improve car safety they should outlaw touchscreens instead.

It sounds like they should do both, then?

That's what I was saying, yes.
Post reply on HN