![]() |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
03-15-2012, 12:53 PM
|
#16 |
|
Let me take this duck off
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: BC
Oddometer: 2,040
|
As with any tech price goes down with the number of units. 5 grand for a pc in 1982 with a 5 meg hardrive. Now 200 bucks. Will people get lazy shit yah if all you have to do to park is press a button. The only real reason I like this is because every time I ve been hit on a bike it's by someone turning without seeing me. Same goes for being hit will walking twice while crossing at stops signs. Most simple crashes might go bye bye because the car brake or warns you .
__________________
Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body,but rather to skid in sideways totally worn out shouting WHAT A RUSH, WHAT A RIDE. Got to go places to be, people to kill and far to many woman. |
|
|
03-15-2012, 01:39 PM
|
#17 | ||
|
You rode a what to where?
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Western NC
Oddometer: 1,073
|
Quote:
That positive trend is due almost entirely to "the invention of new technology to solve problems". A similar but somewhat less dramatic trend also exists for overall accident rate (not just fatalities) on a per vehicle mile traveled basis. Do you have any references to indicate that more training or testing will result in a significant improvement in traffic safety? Not just anecdotes or comparisons to Germany, but real numbers for how much driver safety improves long-term with a given level of training? Historical crash and fatality statistics say that cars are very clearly going in the right direction. The "pure" car from the odl days with only a dashboard and an AM radio to divert the operator's attention was statistically much more dangerous than a distraction-laden modern car. Quote:
Historically, additional safety tech has not proven to be "a wash" - better tech makes driving significantly safe for everybody. Period. Your "coddling" theory is likewise not supported by data - a reduction in the fatality rate does not increase the overall crash rate. The efficacy of technology based solutions to road safety is supported by mountains of data from all over the world. You can raise some legitimate questions about the cost, or reliability, or even the morality of these systems. However, if you plan to claim that they don't actually work, you had better have some gold-standard data to back up your position. |
||
|
|
03-15-2012, 02:05 PM
|
#18 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: May 2008
Location: Huntsville, AL
Oddometer: 4,105
|
Quote:
ABS is probably an improvement but plenty of people are still slamming into each other. Today's cars just crash better. As for trying to improve overall driver training, it has not really been tried in this country (except for when driver training was first implemented) and probably never will so I doubt we will ever know if it works. As for the system this thread is about, it's completely different from all the technology used so far to reduce the fatality rate. I'm sure someday we'll see not only this system, but will eventually all of our vehicles will be driven by computers and we will only be passengers. For most of out society, they will probably be happy with this since they will be able to dedicate all their attention to texting, tweeting, playing video games, putting on makeup, etc. I just hope It doesn't happen while I'm still around. |
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 02:09 PM
|
#19 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Pacific NorthWet, Napa Valley North
Oddometer: 3,680
|
Quote:
The Long-Term Effect of ABS in Passenger Cars and LTVs So- Numbers and references, please? I'm willing to credit wider, straighter roads, lower speed limits, and better handling cars more than active technology. Nothing will replace the analog meatware computer in the next eight years- nor should it, IMO. dwoodward screwed with this post 03-15-2012 at 02:27 PM Reason: "single digit", not "low single digit" |
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 02:17 PM
|
#20 |
|
Rides slow bike slow
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: New(er) Mexico
Oddometer: 9,543
|
I have no problem with passive technology that saves lives.
I have a problem with active technology that is stepping towards driving the car FOR you. Cars that brake if you follow too closely. Cars that brake hard if they sense an impending accident. Cars that turn things on and off for you. Cars that park themselves, etc. History* has proven that people start relying too heavily on this technology and start driving more and more like asshats just because they no longer no any better or, more likely, don't care. "Oh I don't need to set a safe following distance; the car will do it for me! -- this will shortly turn into "Safe following distance, what the F is that? My car just decides how far behind I should be." "Oh I don't need to learn proper braking distances based on speed, the car will do it for me." -- turns into "braking disWHAT? My car just stops when there is some fool in the way! GTFO OF THE WAY FOOL!" *my own made up history
__________________
You couldn't hear a dump truck driving through a nitro glycerin plant!Cobbie Award Winner |
|
|
03-15-2012, 02:31 PM
|
#21 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Pacific NorthWet, Napa Valley North
Oddometer: 3,680
|
Quote:
Improving driver [rider] training means extending it beyond basics and into refreshers... at the very least, people practicing the skills they have. |
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 02:34 PM
|
#22 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: May 2008
Location: Huntsville, AL
Oddometer: 4,105
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 03:26 PM
|
#23 | ||
|
You rode a what to where?
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Western NC
Oddometer: 1,073
|
Quote:
http://www.michigantrafficcrashfacts...10/years_2.pdf I didn't calculate everything out for all years, but just dividing total crashes by miles traveled for every tenth year and converting to convenient units gives: 1960 = 6.5 1970 = 5.9 1980 = 5.1 1990 = 4.7 2000 = 4.4 2010 = 2.8 There are absolutely other factors impacting this, but the time period involved is long enough that it accounts for changes in speed limits, etc. There are also some factors involved that would bias towards more crashes with time; for example, number of vehicles on the road. I didn't do the math on crashes per unit vehicle, but since the vehicle registrations steadily increase and more than double between 1960 and 2010 the resulting shift should be similar. The more important point is that it supports the following contentions: -Driving skill does not appear to be getting worse, as evidenced by drivers not crashing more often; despite the proliferation of common boogeymen such as cell phones, in car entertainment, and "coddling" systems. -Technological solutions are an effective way to prevent (or mitigate the effects of) inadequate driving skill. Quote:
Do you also regret that the "purity" of heating your home and cooking over an open fire pit in the living room has been replaced by the much safer, more effective, and less time-intensive alternative of fully automated central HVAC? |
||
|
|
03-15-2012, 04:05 PM
|
#24 |
|
Feral Chia tamer
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Left of the dial. Canton, NC
Oddometer: 2,597
|
There is only one answer. Remove seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, traction control, etc etc.
Equip all new cars with a sharpened (then allowed to rust) rail road spike mounted in the center of the steering wheel. Drivers will improve. I am not being sarcastic.
__________________
Mutt'n the custard. On the outside with my back turned. |
|
|
03-15-2012, 05:41 PM
|
#25 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: May 2008
Location: Huntsville, AL
Oddometer: 4,105
|
Quote:
Bingo!!! You have just one the grand prize. Most people do consider driving to be a chore. This is a major reason why they are not good at it. As a motorcycle rider, do you consider riding to be a chore??? Would you rather have a fully automated bike that you could just sit on while it did everything for you??? As for what I think about technology and the future. The way things are headed at this time I see a future where we will become just like the Borg; just a bunch of drones who are part of the collective. This may be very efficient and safe, but not something I wish to be part of. |
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 05:47 PM
|
#26 |
|
PsyKotic Waterfowl
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Seattle (Berkeley with rain)
Oddometer: 9,970
|
"I'm sorry but my car didn't see you."
__________________
93 K1100LT, 94 K1100RS, 86-97 K75F (K75/100/1100 Frankenbrick), 91 K1, 05 KTM 450 SMR IBA #17739 (SS1K, BBG, 50CC) http://home.comcast.net/~smithduck/BMW_Tours.htm |
|
|
03-16-2012, 10:36 AM
|
#27 | |
|
Gnarly Adventurer
Joined: Oct 2011
Location: Washington, D.C.
Oddometer: 417
|
Quote:
What I'm talking about is the growth of distracted driving, and technology that indulges distracted driving. Cel phone/texting being enemy #1, but also putting dashboard GPS/video/you-name-it in the car as well. It's like we spent decades making driving so safe that we're now committed to finding ways to make driving UNSAFE again. |
|
|
|
03-17-2012, 06:47 PM
|
#28 | |
|
Let me take this duck off
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: BC
Oddometer: 2,040
|
Quote:
__________________
Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body,but rather to skid in sideways totally worn out shouting WHAT A RUSH, WHAT A RIDE. Got to go places to be, people to kill and far to many woman. |
|
|
|
03-17-2012, 07:01 PM
|
#29 | |
|
Beastly Adventurer
Joined: Nov 2010
Oddometer: 1,594
|
Quote:
![]() Annnnddd... number FOURExpecting technology to make up for stupid/self-distracted/inept driving makes as much sense as trying to spend your way out of debt.
|
|
|
|
03-18-2012, 08:11 AM
|
#30 | ||
|
Adventurer
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: NW Montana
Oddometer: 45
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
![]() |
| Share |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|