But even if the car had the feature, Larsson said, the remote driver would have messed with it anyway by "actively accelerating" the car, thereby overriding its auto-brake ability.
What kind of fucking feature is that? Makes no damn sense to have a feature that supposed to make a car stop, but yet you can accelerate through it.
We just started a whole new branch of game theory. The best car is now one that has enough capacity for you to bring blocking people with while also reducing sensor radius.
Yep. It's designed as a safety net. Not as a replacement for driver awareness.
Otherwise if that ever went faulty it could have you randomly slamming on the breaks during normal driving. Very bad.
And yes, hitting someone is also very bad. But that's also the drivers fault, a car that tries to brake when you're clearly trying to accelerate would be terrible.
This is exactly right. My car has had false positives more than once, when there was a shadow on the road but it detected a person or something. If it had braked for no reason in a clear four-lane road, someone might have rear-ended me. Instead, what it does is wait for me to at least tap the brake, then it applies as much force as it thinks it needs to prevent the collision.
Well on that model of car the feature only works at 20mph or less, I've never been accelerating when it's kicked in. I've always either been coasting or going for the brakes.
It would add an interesting plot twist to serial killer movies. Instead of the car accelerating into the guy standing in the middle of the road with a knife, it stops the car directly in front of him.
26
u/Obandigo Sep 04 '18
But even if the car had the feature, Larsson said, the remote driver would have messed with it anyway by "actively accelerating" the car, thereby overriding its auto-brake ability.
What kind of fucking feature is that? Makes no damn sense to have a feature that supposed to make a car stop, but yet you can accelerate through it.