1 2 3
4cylndrfury
4cylndrfury MegaDork
2/5/14 9:44 a.m.
alfadriver wrote:
novaderrik wrote:
jde wrote: Have worked peripherally with this technology for approaching 3 years. It's for passive warnings triggered by GPS, wireless connectivity, etc. Not quite as heinous as some of you are fearing. Has nothing to do with autonomous vehicle programs, and the systems can do nothing more than provide visual/auditory/haptic feedback. You're still entitled to not heed the warnings and plow into things as you see fit. ;-) The warnings are comparable and complimentary to alerts from radar-based blind spot, collision, etc. warnings already in production. Radar has its strengths; this system has its strengths. Overview of the system: https://vimeo.com/45533527
it's a slippery slope thing.. there's already too much nanny state crap in cars as it is, and they just want to keep adding more and more... until eventually it's illegal to drive your cars or use them for anything but transportation from point A to point B, and only if you have a good reason for going there..
If you really believe that, you should commute with a car that uses a hand crank. That way all of the safety items are not on the car at all- crank starter (broken hands), all weel brakes, disk brakes, safety glass, seat belts- none of that sissy stuff anymore. No point in even considering a car with a glue in laminated windshield, or any kind of crash structure, or reliable fuelling and ignition systems.... World is always coming to an end.... In a billion years, when the sun is so big that it envelopes the world, that may happen.

There are PERFECTLY SAFE cars from the 90s, running around everywhere, without black boxes, blind spot detection, auto brakes, wireless connectivity, and drive-by-computer-throttle...all perfectly safe, with their eleventeen gazillion airbags intact and all. Passive safety systems are all well and good...like your laminated glass and whatnot. But laminated glass doesnt keep my from exerting my will upon the device I paid for. IMHO, the 90s was the perfect cross between simplicity and innovation in the EFI age. Before that, EFI cars were unreliable and problematic. Since then,theyve gone down a rabbit hole to where their functionality is less transport and more a place to put your body while you multi-task as you travel to the office.

I get it, driving is a privilege and all that jazz...but instead of conforming an entire way of life to the lowest common denominator (retards in cars), lets keep the tards from ruining the game for the rest of us.

Nanny BS is too expensive, and too intrusive. End of story. As are push button cup warmers and touch screen tire monitors. This particular automation issue is coming from Uncle Sam, but I think half of the bigger-problem is the Ian Malcolm syndrome - "...your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should". Detroit (et al) is so determined to be the first to bring some "earth shattering new technology" to market that theyre bloating cars beyond recognition for no reason except to say "look what we did". Its the manufacturing version of news sources vomiting words into the world before they even verify the words are accurate.

The other half are the morons behind the wheel and their lack of real training in the operation of their bloatmobiles, but thats an argument for another day.

Xceler8x
Xceler8x GRM+ Memberand UltraDork
2/5/14 10:14 a.m.

You guys really need to start taking laxatives. (Smiley face for the easily offended aka sensitive)

The end of the world is not nigh. You can still drive your own car. You can still enjoy the open road. The vast majority of this will help to keep other drivers from bouncing their car off of your car. We all know every one of us is a perfect and above average driver. The other guy is the one you worry about. This tech will help to alleviate that worry and allow your kids and loved ones to come home unharmed more often. To address some of the more pointed concerns:

    • Most new cars already have these sensors installed. Blind spot sensors. Collision sensors. Smart cruise control that adjusts to the car's speed in front of you, etc, etc. It's good stuff! I have it on my car now and it's really, really nice. I pay attention like before. I drive like before. I just have the added benefit of an alarm going off if a car brakes in front of me suddenly. I have cruise control that adjusts to match traffic. I have blind spot sensors so I have an extra set of eyes watching so I don't cut anyone off accidentally. All this is progress just like fuel injection, disc brakes, and seat belts.
    • The gubmint has more data on you as of right now than could be gleaned from your car. They'll continue to gather it as long as there is an NSA or other alphabet agency. Automatic toll paying thingamajigs? People said they would give tickets using those as well. I seem to recall that happening once in NJ and there was an uproar so the municipality stopped. In VA they'd rather you pay the toll then give you a ticket via data collected from it. It's ok. This will be helpful.
    • Cost. It's already factored in fellows. Like I said, most cars already have this functionality. The cost will go up for other reasons than charging you for sensors the car already has and are used for things like backup collision warnings. Besides, we'll make it up once they outlaw combustion engines and replace them with fuel cells that utilize the tears of 3rd world orphans for motorvation.

Change isn't always bad. It just is. Also, just so you know I'm a complete hypocrite....I really want a non-computerized ride to wrench on. Something muscley and barbaric. Variety is not to be overrated.

novaderrik
novaderrik PowerDork
2/5/14 12:37 p.m.

i don't "worry" about the "other guy"- i do my best to keep myself out of situations where the "other guy" isn't anything more than someone that i pass as i go about my business. if i'm tooling down the road and see someone driving in full retard mode, then i do what i can to avoid having my car occupy the same point in space as their car, which is a strategy that has been 100% effective in over 23 years of licensed driving on my part. i don't want or need my car to do it for me.

someone said that the 90's was the perfect era for cars- which i pretty much agree with. they had just the right mix of high tech and low tech, with a lot of the cars from the first half of that decade not even having airbags and ABS was an option in a lot of cases, but generally became a mandatory part of a given model as new versions were rolled out.

JoeyM
JoeyM Mod Squad
2/5/14 12:48 p.m.
Xceler8x wrote: Change isn't always bad. It just USUALLY is.

FTFY

N Sperlo
N Sperlo MegaDork
2/5/14 12:50 p.m.
jmthunderbirdturbo wrote: i own the oldest car in my family. i intend to keep it that way. that is all. -J0N

Yep. I like my old beater with auto-nothing.

jde
jde Reader
2/6/14 8:48 a.m.
4cylndrfury wrote: There are PERFECTLY SAFE cars from the 90s...

Every car is perfectly safe until it hits something/someone.

I don't disagree with your points, but as you mentioned, driver training in this country isn't going to fundamentally change anytime soon.

From my experience, those of us are here aren't necessarily in the sweet spot for greatest benefit by being heads up drivers. However, there are aspects that would benefit us by providing alerts to threats we're unable to see. Best example is running in traffic, and a car you can't see several cars ahead has to suddenly brake. If the braking is hard enough, you receive a warning before the brake lights come on ahead of you, buying you reaction time.

While bloat is an issue with vehicles, the basic hardware is what's already in smartphones, and is intended to make use of existing displays, etc.

Personally, IMO, I prefer the idea of simpler passive features to theoretically prevent collisions than complex active systems to theoretically make collisions less severe.

The media haven't done the best job explaining the system, since they tend to lump it in with autonomous vehicles, active safety. When I first got involved, I thought the whole thing seemed ridiculous, and cynically thought "Why don't we just teach people to drive?" Over time, learning more, and working with a wide range of "civilians," I began to see how it could definitely benefit the average driver, and hopefully prevent injuries and fatalities. If you chalk that up to drinking the Kool Aid, so be it. ;-)

1 2 3

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
gYR3gsfajS7w5dSwzL7Y0tMiHJeIWlLVBNAqO8o1U2woEZTQ0yPNyNDZEotVEMbo