SquishWindow t1_iy006y0 wrote
Reply to comment by MrPterodactyl in The Exceptionally American Problem of Rising Roadway Deaths (includes a focus on pedestrian and cyclist deaths in DC) by woulditkillyoutolift
> Just force manufacturers to make more manuals.
There isn't really any such thing right now as a manual EV, that's not how their gearing works. Forcing manual production would mean forcing production of ICEs. There are better ways of making safer roads.
> Put massive taxes on vehicle autonomy features.
Are vehicle autonomy features bad for pedestrian safety? Obviously it's bad when a "self-driving" car hits a pedestrian. But I'm not sure that the net effect of vehicle autonomy features is negative for pedestrian safety; I assume that some smart features like automatic braking will have positive effects for pedestrian safety.
ohdangherewego t1_iy04001 wrote
I think we're still in too young a phase with autonomous vehicles. Theoretically, computers should be able to avoid pedestrians/cyclists much better than (very distractable) human drivers, but I don't know if the technology is fully there yet.
I for one, can't wait - my desire to live as a pedestrian/cyclist greatly outweighs my desire to drive a vehicle myself.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379718320932
SquishWindow t1_iy05oh0 wrote
> I think we're still in too young a phase with autonomous vehicles. Theoretically, computers should be able to avoid pedestrians/cyclists much better than (very distractable) human drivers, but I don't know if the technology is fully there yet.
If we define "autonomous vehicles" as something like "full self driving cars" then yeah obviously the technology isn't there yet. That said, I think there is a lot of technology available right now that is well short of that threshold that could save plenty of pedestrian lives. Automatic emergency braking already exists in a number of cars and hopefully already helps avoid some pedestrian collisions (especially in daylight). We also definitely have the technology to actually enforce speed limits by software if we wanted to, we just lack the will.
On the whole, I would not seek to discourage vehicle autonomy features right now, despite the existence and well-publicized failures of of Musk the Moron. In the long run I'm sure they will be a good thing, and they are already probably having some meaningful positive effects.
ohdangherewego t1_iy0o6sw wrote
Yeah - we def need more movement towards this and not away, and I get that there's a lot of good stuff we can do before we get to full autonomous operation
However - going by the reactions of engineers working on this technology, I don't think it is as far along as either of us want right now.
MrPterodactyl t1_iy06v44 wrote
I believe that slowing down EV adoption isn't a bad thing for multiple off-topic reasons.
When self-driving car technology is fully developed, then yes, that will be better for pedestrian safety. A computer cannot get fatigued, drunk, distracted, etc. However, this is a lot farther away than most people think.
Semi-autonomous driving, however, is an absolutely awful idea and will produce even worse drivers than we have now. Tons of people are getting their driving reflexes accustomed to adaptive cruise control and lane keep assist. What happens if they are in a situation where they have to drive an older car?
SquishWindow t1_iy08mak wrote
> slowing down EV adoption isn't a bad thing
Disagree. Rapid EV adoption is an imperative. But it does create urgency to improve road safety in the meantime, because EVs are heavier and faster (and therefore more dangerous) than ICE counterparts.
> Semi-autonomous driving, however, is an absolutely awful idea and will produce even worse drivers than we have now. Tons of people are getting their driving reflexes accustomed to adaptive cruise control and lane keep assist.
IDK, this isn't obvious to me, it just seems like a narrow intuitive argument and I don't think I am fully on board with your intuitions. Most "semi-autonomous" features are features that engage under very rare and extreme circumstances, 99+% of the time drivers are driving their cars the exact same way we always have. It's not obvious to me that having some semi-autonomous safety features that engage under rare circumstances will radically change the driving behavior that drivers develop as they learn to drive. And even if it did, it would still be a question of how many accidents were avoided vs. caused by that change.
> What happens if they are in a situation where they have to drive an older car?
Sure, maybe they would be worse drivers in an older car. That seems like an edge case, though - as above, it becomes a question of whether accidents caused in those circumstances are more frequent or worse than the accidents avoided the rest of the time. It is also something that will gradually go away over the course of the transition towards vehicles with more semi-autonomous safety features, rather than a permanent problem with semi-autonomous features. Like, I'm sure that drivers today with backup cameras would be really shitty at parallel parking a car if they had to drive an older car with only a rear-view mirror... but we are rapidly approaching the point at which the likelihood of them ever having to drive an old car without a backup camera is getting pretty low.
MrPterodactyl t1_iy0dzxq wrote
> Most "semi-autonomous" features are features that engage under very rare and extreme circumstances, 99+% of the time drivers are driving their cars the exact same way we always have.
https://www.tesla.com/support/autopilot
This isn't the case. Tesla autopilot can steer and change lanes autonomously. Other car manufacturers will catch up if they haven't already.
This is just going to train people to not pay attention while driving.
I do not believe the sensors that ensure your hands are on the steering wheel and your eyes are on the road will do an adequate job of ensuring the driver is paying attention.
Even if these systems are not actively defeated, how many of us know how to daydream while keeping our eyes forward and hands in a certain position?
SquishWindow t1_iy0evbt wrote
> This is just going to train people to not pay attention while driving.
I think it's TBD. Most people don't turn on smart cruise control until they are on a highway; the entire time that they are pulling out of their house, driving through neighborhood streets, and navigating to a freeway, they have to do all the normal work that drivers do to make sure they stay in their lane and not hit what's in front of them.
And again, ultimately what will matter is the number of accidents averted. If we have shitty drivers in safer cars, that might result in safer streets even as drivers themselves become worse. Like, I wouldn't be surprised if rear cameras and some of the automatic parking features in cars today have, on average, made people less skilled at parallel parking. But that doesn't mean there are more accidents while parallel parking than there used to be. It just means that if you gave today's driver yesterday's technology, they would be worse at using it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments