Like so many of us, my childhood was dominated by Lego. I kept mine in an old suitcase that, I almost hate to admit, I still have somewhere.
What did we build with all of those Lego bricks? Cars. Lots and lots of cars. Some sort of resembled real cars, some followed our imaginations off into the wilds.
I remember a particular car built by Michael, my next-door neighbor. Among its defining features was a horizontal board hanging off the nose. It wasn’t a wing, but rather a snooper that could read the road. This feature allowed the car’s driver to join the other occupants in the pool–because, seriously, what Lego dream car doesn’t have an onboard swimming pool?
That amazing future is here now. Tesla Autopilot, despite that news-making fatal wreck, has delivered thousands of safe miles. We recently sampled a new Cadillac SUV that would steer back into the lane when we veered it too close to the boundaries. This week we’re driving a Subaru fitted with radar cruise control, something that once seemed sci-fi yet is now rather commonplace.
More useful technology: My home sprinklers talk to the cloud and only operate when needed. I’ll probably pull the trigger on a Nest home automation system soon, too.
It’s not about having the latest gadget. I think about it like this: Why should I waste my time and brainpower on those mundane chores, especially when in the long run I can save some electricity, too? I’m going to let computers handle those functions so I can do more fun stuff.
The big question, of course, is how much control are we each willing to give up when it comes to driving?
I recently made two back-to-back trips across Florida, meaning plenty of time on 1–4 while surrounded by both locals and tourists. My M.O. is simple: I get in the middle or right lane, pick a comfortable speed, and gobble up the miles. I don’t need to constantly speed up and slow down in a futile effort to pass every other car on the road. My goal: Arrive alive and not stressed out.
From my comfortable spot I can also watch the flow of traffic, and there’s one pattern that we have all seen: Someone in the left lane holds up the faster drivers, leading them to pass on the right. Most people don’t expect to be passed on the right–or they’re just that oblivious to everything–so this sometimes results in a bit of chaos.
On one of my trips I watched a bus attempt to pass a slower car on the right. And partway through the maneuver, the car being passed decided to merge to the right–smack dab into the real estate currently occupied by the bus.
But wait, that’s not all: While the bus was passing that car on the right, another driver was passing the bus on the right.
So from my front-row seat, I watched this whole cluster play out in real time. Like three drunks, first they swerved one way and then in near unison they swerved the other. Fortunately after this dance–and more than a few gasps–everyone regained their positions and we all miraculously continued west toward Tampa with zero paint trading.
I don’t think we can make the modern driver any smarter, especially with all of the distractions we now face. You can blame smartphones, Pokémon or whatever, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to the meatbag behind the wheel.
Perhaps it is time to make our cars smarter.
We have discussed autonomous cars on our message board, and Flyin’ Miata’s Keith Tanner posted a logical analogy: “Riding horses used to be something you had to do to get around. The car took them out of the equation, so horse riding became recreational with dedicated riding areas. You no longer had to ride a horse when you didn’t want to. It became something you did because you wanted to.”
So maybe that’s our future. Those of us who enjoy driving cars will get to do so away from those who don’t–and away from those who view the driver’s seat as a place for personal grooming, cell phone calls and Facebooking.
Of course, there is Skynet, the futuristic all-knowing computer system from the “Terminator” series: “Decided our fate in a microsecond: extermination.”
Which future is the correct one? Personally, I’m going to remain cautiously optimistic.
This article is from an old issue of Grassroots Motorsports. Get all the latest how-tos and stories for just $20 a year. Subscribe now.
Except for a dip during WWII, between 30,000 and 55,000 people have died on the road each and every year since ~1930.
As much as I hate to say it: If widespread implementation of autonomous driving cars can decrease that by an order of magnitude, which I believe it can, then there is absolutely no question in my mind about what should ultimately happen.
I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making.
It needs to make speeds of 120mph+ a normal thing. Imagine being able to drive 1,000 miles in 5 hours overnight while sleeping. That is the big pay off for me.
Bobzilla wrote: I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making.
"Breeding the lowest common denominator" and "the consequences of poor decision making" in regards to driving fatalities are NOT one and the same...Or would you like to share those sentiments as your 'condolences' to the all of the families grieving the loss of loved ones as the result of drivers in other cars having made poor decisions?
Driven5 wrote:Bobzilla wrote: I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making."Breeding the lowest common denominator" and "the consequences of poor decision making" in regards to driving fatalities are NOT one and the same...Or would you like to share those sentiments as your 'condolences' to the families grieving the loss of loved ones as the result of drivers in other cars having made poor decisions?
Sorry, your outrage is unmoving. I'm a firm believer in removing all nanny devices and bringing back natural selection. But then again, the "think of the children" argument has been beaten to death to the point that many of us no longer hear it.
Your argument assumes that all driving fatalities are the result of someone else's poor decisions. That is completely false. The opposite is not true either. So let's leave silly strawmen to guard the tomatoes.
I have driven literally hundreds of thousands of miles and never had a wreck where I was at fault. If what is stated above is true, that the number of deaths has remained between 30,000 and 55,000, then the number of deaths per mile has fallen quite a bit, which is a more informative metric than the total number without considering miles driven. The "logical analogy" cited in the original post is a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. I would say it is more the opposite. The advent of cars becoming common place increased individual autonomy, the advent of self driving cars is more likely to lead to reduced autonomy, as the passenger at the steering wheel will be limited by whatever the software designer had in mind when setting up the car.
Bobzilla wrote: I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making.
So, you are in favor of walking everywhere, not going to the doctor, avoiding vaccines, farming your own food, etc?
You don't want to drive. Take a bus.
Bobzilla wrote:Driven5 wrote:Sorry, your outrage is unmoving. I'm a firm believer in removing all nanny devices and bringing back natural selection. But then again, the "think of the children" argument has been beaten to death to the point that many of us no longer hear it. Your argument assumes that all driving fatalities are the result of someone else's poor decisions. That is completely false. The opposite is not true either. So let's leave silly strawmen to guard the tomatoes.Bobzilla wrote: I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making."Breeding the lowest common denominator" and "the consequences of poor decision making" in regards to driving fatalities are NOT one and the same...Or would you like to share those sentiments as your 'condolences' to the families grieving the loss of loved ones as the result of drivers in other cars having made poor decisions?
Your comments directly imply that a person who makes a poor decision is inherently one of the least common denominator, that a person who makes a bad decision is inherently the one who suffers the worst of the consequences, and now that people who die in any given unintentional incident are are inherently the weak link rather than the fittest in the course of natural selection.
Call it what you will, but I have no idea how simply pointing out the completely illogical and irrational nature of your statements, and providing one all-too-common example that illustrates the weakness in your arguments, is somehow "outrage".
If you'd like to leave silly strawmen to guard the tomatoes...You are more than welcome to start doing so at any time.
Bobzilla wrote:Driven5 wrote:Sorry, your outrage is unmoving. I'm a firm believer in removing all nanny devices and bringing back natural selection. But then again, the "think of the children" argument has been beaten to death to the point that many of us no longer hear it. Your argument assumes that all driving fatalities are the result of someone else's poor decisions. That is completely false. The opposite is not true either. So let's leave silly strawmen to guard the tomatoes.Bobzilla wrote: I'm getting tired of breeding the lowest common denominator. Great. One more thing to take away the consequences of poor decision making."Breeding the lowest common denominator" and "the consequences of poor decision making" in regards to driving fatalities are NOT one and the same...Or would you like to share those sentiments as your 'condolences' to the families grieving the loss of loved ones as the result of drivers in other cars having made poor decisions?
But that BS line is getting really, really old.
Just as it is to pretend that life will get better if we remove driving aids.
If you want to drive that way great. But why pretend that having others be that way makes it any better?
While David suggests that modern cars and driving is leading to more distraction- this isn't a new problem. Distractions have been around since the dawn of accidents (which pre-dates cars by millennia). Even IF you got rid of phones, radios, and got your car back to the driving basics, the odds of you being distracted at one time or another is still 100%. Whether that turns into an accident is a different story.
Also, the "lowest common denominator" is total crap, too. Even the highest common denominator person makes mistakes.
But then the idea of just thinning the herd for the sake of thinning it is, well, disturbing.
Displaying 1-10 of 241 commentsView all comments on the GRM forums
You'll need to log in to post.
