[brooksby]

https://slate.com/technology/2021/08/tesla-autopilot-nhtsa-clever.html

The whole article is pretty interesting, but there was one bit I found particularly so (my emphasis):

[quote]

Car buyers want to be safe, and they frequently opt for pricier models or optional ADAS features like collision avoidance that they believe can better protect them. But most customers are far less willing to pay extra to reduce danger posed to people outside their vehicle in the event of a collision.

As a result, carmakers have little incentive to invest in designs or technologies that protect vulnerable road users, since they can’t charge more for them. Worse, automaker’s lineups are steadily shifting toward taller, heavier SUVs and trucks, which provide a sense of security to their occupants while they endanger everyone else on the road.

Researchers have cited this shift toward bulky SUVs and trucks as a key factor in the rising number of vulnerable road users killed on American roadways. Traffic deaths among people inside automobiles, meanwhile, have fallen 28 percent in the last 40 years. Notably, drivers who feel safer behind the wheel may drive more recklessly, assuming that they’ll come out of it OK if they end up in a crash (this is the Peltzman effect, named after an economist who argued that seat belt laws induced riskier driving). Pity the pedestrian or cyclist struck by a driver who felt secure in a Hummer that weighs as much as an elephant.

[/quote]

Topic

[Cycloid]

As we move towards fully

As we move towards fully autonomous cars becoming the norm on our roads this begs the question “what does a car do when a collision is inevitable?”

For example a drverless car meets anoher vehicle overtaking on a blind bend on the wrong side of the road.

Does it go for the head on collision, or does it protect the driver (who has paid a lot of money for the technology) and take out the young mother pushing a buggy on the footpath?

I think we know the answer.

In the past the outcome depended on the reactions and reflexes of the driver, in the future it will depend on a couple of lines of code.

And what about us cyclists?

[Philh68]

The USA car manufacturers

The USA car manufacturers actively resist including pedestrian safety in vehicles because it’s not legislated in the USA and lobby against changing the regulations. To sell vehicles in Europe they need to comply with prevailing regulations which are more stringent on pedestrian protection.

even so, the trend to SUV is causing problems in pedestrian collisions because the increased frontal height changes point of impact and makes it far less likely the pedestrian will go over the vehicle. There’s increases in chest injuries and more severe head injuries. We have been tracking those injury stats in Australia, where our vehicle regulations are more closely tied to European regulations that the USA.

[Philh68]

That’s the guy who lied about

That’s the guy who lied about having investors they didn’t have to manipulate the stocks. I wouldn’t trust a word he says even if it sounds  truthful. Saying “it’s not so great” isn’t an admission that it’s not fit for public roads.

[Simon E]

Meanwhile a self-driving (or

Meanwhile a self-driving (or driverless) Toyota shuttle bus hit and injured a para-athlete on a pedestrian crossing.

Tokyo police said that vehicle operators had told them they “were aware that a person was there but thought [the person] would [realize that a bus was coming] and stop crossing the [street]”.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/aug/28/toyota-pauses-paralympics-self-driving-buses-after-one-hits-visually-impaired-athlete

[Simon E]

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Hmmm unfortunately it’s a US-centric article with statements that aren’t necessarily true in the rest of the world.

I’m not so sure that’s true.

IME people in big, fast, expensive cars drive are more likely to drive like arrogant c**ts, especially on small country lanes. Riding the same roads daily, I get far more impatient overtakes and the all too frequent head-on ‘get outta my way’ incidents with drivers of SUVs and upmarket brands than people in smaller cars.

[brooksby]

I disagree – like I said, the

I disagree – like I said, the article is interesting anyway, but the following points can be ported to ROW (rest of world?) pretty much as is:

• Car buyers want to be safe, and they frequently opt for pricier models or optional ADAS features like collision avoidance that they believe can better protect them. But most customers are far less willing to pay extra to reduce danger posed to people outside their vehicle in the event of a collision.
• As a result, carmakers have little incentive to invest in designs or technologies that protect vulnerable road users, since they can’t charge more for them.
• Worse, automaker’s lineups are steadily shifting toward taller, heavier SUVs and trucks, which provide a sense of security to their occupants while they endanger everyone else on the road.

Common sense, innit?  

[Secret_squirrel]

Hmmm unfortunately it’s a US

Hmmm unfortunately it’s a US-centric article with statements that aren’t necessarily true in the rest of the world. A quick browse of EuroNCAP ratings for example suggest that SUV’s may be a smidge more dangerous than other large family cars but there is enough variation in the pedestrian ratings in each category that it looks pretty marginal. 
So the US car market is pretty different to ROW (US only models, pickups, SUV’s etc) that I’m not sure any of the articles statements can be carried across. 

[hawkinspeter]

Coincedentally, I’ve just

Coincidentally, I’ve just seen this article: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2021/08/musk-turns-on-teslas-latest-full-self-driving-beta-says-its-actually-not-great/

[Author]

Replies