2w ago

Emergency Braking Will Save Lives. Automakers Want to Charge Extra for It

www.wired.com Emergency Braking Will Save Lives. Automakers Want to Charge Extra for It

The tech exists, and vehicles on the road already have it, yet a consortium of carmakers doesn’t want to make this lifesaving equipment standard. The reason is as old as the hills—money.

The tech exists, and vehicles on the road already have it, yet a consortium of carmakers doesn’t want to make this lifesaving equipment standard. The reason is as old as the hills—money.

43 comments

I'm all for forcing manufacturers to implement these safety features but you damn well better make a fuckin law that says they can't pass the cost onto the consumer.
Getting tired of shit going up in price by a few thousand dollars every time something is added.
Although tbf I honestly think traffic laws should be much more strict and be taken much more seriously.
- If you force them to spend hundreds to thousands installing a LIDAR system in each vehicle why can't they get that money back?
  Enforcing traffic laws would be the cheaper solution
  
  More policing is never the cheaper solution.
  
  Because they have the money to spare. And if they don't why are they always reporting record profits?
- Too late, the ultracapitalists already won America. We're all fucked.

@BrikoX Braking as a Service new subscription model dropped.
- DJ! Drop the BaaS!

That shit saved my car's ass at least 2 times and ours once. Never interfered in normal driving (I'm no agressive driver though). This should definitely be forced upon manufacturers. But without relaying the cost onto the consumer.
- The catch is these systems are expensive to build so they can't be free. There's also a huge difference between the system that brakes for another vehicle vs the one that stops because a toddler is behind the car. The latter is extremely expensive.
  
  Sure they are. But considering that my car costs 7000 more since I bought it 2yrs ago, I'd say fuck you manufacturer. Take the extra profits you make, for no other reason than greed, for that. They will survive.

My car gives a warning when it detects a potential collision.
Usually, it's right before I start turning into a turn.
I get it, it's 2-bit brain doesn't realize that the car will not, in fact, drive straight into the wall.
It doesn't realize that I have had my foot off the gas in anticipation.
I would really hate if the car would brake under those circumstances.
- Treated myself to a used Q8 eTron, first nice car I've ever had. I must say, all the bells and whistles, adaptive cruise control that eases off the go pedal when a town comes up, night vision that warns if an animal has a vector crossing mine, hands off stop and go and all that works neatly.
  Emergency braking together with night vision was hard on the brakes once before I even knew that a deer was even there. It crossed into the high beams fractions of a second later and every screen in the car and the HUD had a red triangle in it with a deer symbol while I was already hanging in the seat belt. Yeah, no shit, thanks engineers.
  What I'm saying is: Apparently all that stuff can be made properly, manufacturers just choose not to.
  
  Fair enough. I have an 8 year old Mercedes.
  Perhaps I should get a newer car.

I hate it. But I can understand why people would want it. It often brakes when it feels I'm not braking enough etc but I'm keeping track of what's in front and behind me and I would prefer that it didn't.

As long as I can turn it off I'm happy. The problem is when something screws up the sensors

This reminds me a bit of the seatbelt situation from back in the day.
My only gripe with driver aids that can take over control is that for some more skilled drivers they actually do more harm then good.
I'm a can be a fairly aggressive driver when the time calls for it and I will accelerate towards a stopped car so I can dart into a gap in the lane beside. If the car were to try and intervene it would almost certainly cause an accident where there otherwise would not have been one.
My mom's car has this lane keeping feature in her car where it tries to keep itself centered between the lines on the freeway. But I cannot stand the car pulling me into the center of the lane when I am trying to give space for say a motorcycle to pass or a truck and trailer with a particularly wide load. The car will pull itself back into the middle of the lane going against my wishes. It has almost caused her to hit bikers on more than one occasion. She asked the dealership to take it off but they said they couldn't. It's a built in safety feature and it cannot be disabled blah blah blah.
I think these features are definitely cool for the normal inattentive driver but for people who are hyper observant while driving and they are always doing things with purpose these systems just make a vehicle unpredictable.
- I will accelerate towards a stopped car so I can dart into a gap in the lane beside
  maybe… you should not do that for the sake of literally a couple of seconds. you’re risking the safety of everyone around you
  
  I agree, it's a stupid thing to do and risks you and other around you just so you can save a couple of seconds.
- "I’m a can be a fairly aggressive driver when the time calls for it and I will accelerate towards a stopped car so I can dart into a gap in the lane beside. If the car were to try and intervene it would almost certainly cause an accident where there otherwise would not have been one."
  You aren't hyper observant, you're acting unpredictably in the situation you describe above. You're just a bad driver.
  
  0 accidents. 0 tickets. 0 dings or scrapes of any kind. I get a decent discount on my insurance for being a safe driver. I have avoided several other accidents and given dash cam footage to the people who got into an accident in front of me. I have helped prevent several maybe accidents while being a passenger because I was far more observant than the driver and warned them that a certain car was about to pull out in front of them.
  I've been driving for almost 20 years at this point and the only body damage any of my vehicles have ever gotten have been from my girlfriends hitting inanimate objects at low speeds or trucks kicking up rocks.
- The problem is that these systems are not a replacement for a human. Humans need to be in full control at all times. The problem is that the car companies and law makers apparently think some computer system is more capable than a person.
  There so is the issue of longevity and privacy. At the end of the day I will drive old cars since they are usually easier to work on and build to last.
  
  That and I'm just generally against the government telling me what I have to do. I will wear a seatbelt because it is an obvious safety benefit but I don't think it should be mandatory. If someone wants to skip wearing a safety device then that should be their choice. Plus we need to thin the herd a bit. I say let the idiots who won't wear helmets on bikes die off.
- I have the same feature in my car. To give more space to cyclists, I have a handy trick: simply turn the steering wheel.
  
  Yeah I do that in my car too lol. I'm saying in my mom's car with its lane centering BS if you try and pull to the edge of your lane to give space for a motorcycle or whatever it'll basically fight your input and try to put you back in the middle of the lane. It's legitimately dangerous in my opinion.

43 comments