 |
|
The car’s safety system continuously monitors the road ahead using a radar system, and if it determines a crash may be possible, it matches this with the driver evaluation gathered from the camera. If the driver doesn’t appear to be paying attention it sounds a buzzer and warning light. If things progress and a crash becomes probable then it also tries to gain attention of the driver by quickly applying and releasing the brakes. At this point the car’s pre-crash brake assist system is also readied. When a crash is judged to be unavoidable the safety system engages the brakes and seatbelts for the collision.
I am trying, but I do not see a down side to this….but give me time.
The downside is that we’re all horrible drivers, and that we need our cars to nag at us.
The downside? How about when it doesn’t work in the middle of driving, and thereby decides your car shouldn’t run, etc?
and is it powered by microsoft??? nuttin’ like the blue screen of death to really lead to your death…
wait till the computer industry gets hit by that one…
#2. Good point
None of these “technologies” ever live up to their hype. They should make cars harder to drive not easier.
How about the many situations where braking is not an appropriate response to the situation (ex: ice)?
I currently have a radar cruise control system in my Toyota. It monitors the car in front of you and keeps the distance that you set. If the distance narrows rapidly, it applies the brakes and if the distance gets too small, it sets off a buzzer to warn you while applying the brakes.
The down side is that this will likely be logged and used in lawsuits. Duh.
NO,NO, NO….
we dont need IDIOT PROOF CARS…
we NEED a way to GET RID of the idiots FASTER and SAFER…
It can save a thousand lives. Let it screw up just once, though…
Next step: determining if the driver’s eyes have “excessive redness”.
(I have been told certain smoking materials cause this.. not that _I_ would know personally)
%)
J/P=?
7,
You don’t know much about ABS and ATC I see.
#8 I’m so happy that your car coddles you so you don’t have to pay attention to conditions on the road.
These type of systems treat us like idiots, like we are the ones who must be watched like a two year old. The absolute last thing I want is a computer second guessing me and how I drive.
Except when your car decides to brake check that guy riding your a$$ and flips him over the edge.
14,
You can look to #15 for an excellent argument for “smart” cars. I would gladly give up self-driving for commuting (and I love to drive – I was a field sales manager in Europe when it was still possible to drive fast everywhere on the autobahn) as it would prevent asshats from using their cars to be asshats.
Autonomous car systems hold out promise once they are ubiquitous to create a managed traffic grid where the individual is responsible only for “final mile” navigation. I don’t really want a smart car for me as much as the other idiots on the road (and they probably feel the same about me). Fewer dickheads riding the brake, fewer sissy-marys crawling in the fast lane, and the asshats on the phone can talk all they want in the car.
This ‘eye watching’ system would not work. Try driving in Florida without sun glasses. Forget it.
17,
It would with an IR camera.
I’ve got a mini van that has a lot of bullshit safety options in it. Beeps for all kinds of reasons but the one I hate the most is it’s incessant nagging about my seatbelt when I’m just moving the piece of shit up the driveway. the back up beeper for obstacles is way to sensitive. It should ignore cats and small dogs.
How about an external alert system integrated with these “safety devices” designed to make other drivers aware of what those idiots are doing? With scrolling led signs or something: “Watch out, I’m on the phone”. Then we can drive away from them.
And then I would feel safer.
The Monster’s Lawyer Wrote:
“The back up beeper for obstacles is way to sensitive. It should ignore cats and small dogs.”
So you don’t like cats and small dogs?
Couldn’t resist asking LOL