[panxyh]

Rear view cameras might be better than mirrors in terms of field of view. This doesn't make them objectively better. Disadvantages are well argumented in the article. They are an useful accessory but shouldn't replace real vision.

[aaomidi]

Real vision is fucked when you can’t actually see what’s behind your car.

Cameras will prevent a lot of unnecessary property damage, and more importantly, fully mitigate risk of killing humans/animals that are behind the car and outside the field of view.

[skywhopper]

No one is arguing cameras shouldn’t exist. In fact, back up cameras are mandatory in the US. But replacing mirrors and windows with cameras is bad, actually.

[panxyh]

Yes, their purpose and usefulness is obvious. As a supplement. Mirrors should be left as they are.

[bityard]

Lots of cars don't combine the rear-view mirror and backup camera into the same thing. (And shouldn't.)

[afh1]

Why not both? My Honda has mirrors and a rear view camera. I always check both before backing up. The camera is viewed on a small (for today's standards) LCD screen (with physical buttons, no touchscreen) that also serves as the radio.

[panxyh]

The discussion isn't as much about a common backing camera (which also falls under 'useful accessory' I mentioned), but about cameras replacing mirrors.