[fixermark]

I'll be honest, I still prefer it to the world where lack of software kills people.

... I avoided running over that child I couldn't see in my rear-view because the infrared sensors picked him up as a mobile object intersecting my path and the backup warning screamed at me. I like not killing people, so I call that a win.

[geggam]

Have you had to fight your lane assist yet ?

I am all for the sensors to give me information but when the systems take over control I am not a fan.

Cyclists in the EU have learned that the car sensors will slam on the brakes. Quite irritating when the car slams on the brakes and they are laughing at you.

[fixermark]

Ah, see, I'm American. ;)

The lane assist can be disabled and a cyclist who hard-brakes in front of me is taking their life in their hands because my Ford only stops if I touch the brake (it just stops as hard as it needs to to minimize risk of impact, regardless of how soft I push the pedal).

(Sidebar: I almost feel like that cyclist game is something that should be solved with more sensors. If it's a common issue, you really want a dash cam to capture their image and report them to police, as inentionally hard-braking to trigger a car safety system is clearly endangering their lives and the lives of the car occupants, since the auto-brake is designed with a bias towards injuring occupants over killing anyone).

[geggam]

I am an American too, renting an Audi in Germany has caused me many learning experiences. Like take the 30 minutes to learn the computer system before you take off because attempting to turn things off at speed is interesting when you cant find it.

Audi presense is nice, lane assist is nice, adaptive cruise control is nice etc etc but when its not nice it gives you whiplash or heart attacks

And that ever pervasive feeling that you know somwehere is a bug in that code which could yank your steering wheel sideways or slam on the brakes randomly

[penagwin]

The cyclist issue is something I don't consider a fault of software or the car's design. Driving/Cycling/Walking in front of a high speed vehicle who has the right of way to the point that they need to break means you should not have been there to begin with.

The car's only other option is to hit the cyclist, so as far as I'm concerned it's doing it job correctly. Like you mention a dashcam is likely the only remedy here. Thankfully they're cheap and pretty common...

[bambax]

I think the grandparent is talking about a situation where the cyclist is _behind_ the car and not in front of it. A modern car that brakes hard can decelerate much faster than a bike, and therefore becomes a brick wall.

When I'm on a bicycle I try to avoid cars as much as possible (by being in a lane for bikes, or on the sidewalk) but sometimes we have to share the road. Then I'd rather ride opposite to traffic because at least I see the cars incoming and can avoid them.

[geggam]

Yes, the rear. I didnt make that clear.

When backing out the bikes can be 50 ft away coming fast and the car senses they will be close so it slams on the brakes way before anyone is in danger.

Coffee spills etc

[penagwin]

Whoops my bad! I thought you meant they were purposely traveling in front of the car, knowing it's sensors would force it to stop. It'd be super moronic and dangerous, but if you recognized the car model it would at least be possible.

[salawat]

No. No. No.

So we need more software to solve problems created by software being exploited by people.

I have a much simpler solution that doesn't involve taking away from someone's agency.

A)look both ways before crossing

B) Don't drive the piece of equipment distracted.

The more sensors we put on cars, the more we lay the foundations for technologies that can handle will be used in tyrannical ways. No thanks.