Amazing Things Your Automobile Can't Do

dslmodem submitted this NYT story on nifty automobile technology that isn't coming to the United States. The report suggests that legal liability is a significant reason for not offering various driver-distracting options in the U.S.

Comments

good, we don't need that crap.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're going to drive an urban assault vehicle, then get off the phone & keep your eyes on the road.

Re:good, we don't need that crap.

[The_K4]

Jest this weekend I was driving a stick shift truck with a UHAUL trailer behind it when my cell phone rang. I had to use the same hand for my Egg McMuffin and the wheel, while using my other hand for the speaker phone and the stick shift. Considering the pooring rain and my broekn foot i thought I was doing pretty well.

Re:good, we don't need that crap.

[Idarubicin]

(Score: -1, Didn't Get Joke)

Though to be fair, I have to agree--the McWhatsit family of breakfast products are pretty gross....

Stuff British cars have

[Xpilot]

I haven't read the article, but I assume American cars won't have ejection seats, machine guns and rocket launchers hidden with a flip of a switch like those British Aston Martins have.

Re:Stuff British cars have

[dcphoenix]

.....American cars won't have ejection seats, machine guns and rocket launchers.....

Why bother using a foreign car to blow stuff up and get tossed into the air? Buy American - get a Pinto!!

Re:Stuff British cars have

[Erik Hollensbe]

I had a buddy who was a gear head and use to race drag when we were in high school...

His car? A pinto. The car is so damned light that it beats a lot of muscle cars for the 1/4, and nothing, I mean nothing, is worth more than the look on the face of someone who was just beaten by a car known far as wide for it's lack of anything worthy.

I get a similar feeling when people realize they were just owned by my wife at CS. :)

Re:Stuff British cars have

[neolith]

His car? A pinto. The car is so damned light that it beats a lot of muscle cars for the 1/4, and nothing, I mean nothing, is worth more than the look on the face of someone who was just beaten by a car known far as wide for it's lack of anything worthy.

I get a similar feeling when people realize they were just owned by my wife at CS. :)

I personally can't wait to find out what happens when your geeky wife logs onto slashdot and finds you implicitly comparing her to something known far and wide for its lack of anything worthy. Buddy, are you in for the "-1, flamebait" of your life...

Glad

[jdc180]

I'm GLAD that those features aren't available in the US. I don't need the added worry that they guy in the car next to me is reading slashdot, or trying to keep up with the lyrics on some karaoke song!

Re:Glad

[SlamMan]

But I have to admit, people around DC drive like they're trying to play Dance Dance Revolution.

Re:Glad

[Bobman1235]

I'm GLAD that those features aren't available in the US. I don't need the added worry that they guy in the car next to me is reading slashdot, or trying to keep up with the lyrics on some karaoke song!

The point is, that guy next to you CAN do all those things (read : laptop?), BUT that guy won't take responsibility for his.... LACK of responsibility, he'll blame the manufacturer of the device that's "distracting" him. There ARE applications where these toys would be fun and SAFE to have, but in the States we have to worry about liability for EVERYTHING, and it's restricting more and more markets.

Re:Glad

[ConceptJunkie]

The only city where people stop for the green and go through the red.

And the traffic cameras get you a ticket on the green.

Washington drivers are dense, but in places liek Boston, it's cutthroat, and you know what, I could deal with that because it's more predictable. Nothing is worse than someone coming to a complete stop on an entrance ramp to the Beltway.

As an unrepentant gadget freak, I don't find most of the devices appealing. It's just more grossly overpriced crap to sell you. Give me a decent stereo and my cellphone headset and I'm fine. I can see the benefits of the navigation systems, but I can function just fine without one.

We still don't have a lot of 'em....

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing that is very cool that they have in Europe is 'TMC' -- radio stations will broadcast traffic alerts on where there is bad traffic. This will automagically update the route computers in most cars' naviation systems to find an alternate route around the traffic jam. No-one in the states has it, but it is standard with all VW/Audi/Skoda/Seat NAV+ units in the EU. Absolutely shameful.

Tort Reform Redux

[geomon]

The tort system does need revision, but the only proposal I've seen so far gives relief exclusively to corporations. For tort reform to work, it will have to include:

1) eliminating slap suits,
2) limiting damages that individuals must pay to corporations (what's good for the goose, etc), and
3) shifting the burden of proof from the defendant to the plaintiff (same as for criminal cases).

Then I can support tort reform.

Otherwise tort reform is yet another corporate bailout.

Re:Tort Reform Redux

[Maestro4k]

• The tort system does need revision, but the only proposal I've seen so far gives relief exclusively to corporations.

While I agree that we need Tort reform in general, in this case I don't see the threat of lawsuits as a problem. Frankly these are things that aren't needed in cars, especially not for the driver. Even with reasonable restrictions in place (shutting off the video when the car goes faster than 3mph) wouldn't stop idiots from killing themselves and others because of these distractions.

While a lot of the resulting carnage would probably be from people disabling built in safety restrictions, ultimately it's hard not to blame the company for selling something like a TV screen built-in to a car for the driver's usage. In this case the fear of lawsuits is probably helping to prevent many, many deaths due to unnecessary, distracting, potentially deadly car accessories.

Re:Tort Reform Redux

[donutello]

One of the biggest problems with the current tort system is the cost of the proceedings in and of themselves. In many, many cases, it is far more economical for the insurance company to settle out of court even when the plaintiff has no case.

A couple of true stories I have personal knowledge of:
- A friend's girlfriend ate something that gave her food poisoning at a restaurant while traveling. On the flight back, she got violently ill and had to be admitted to a hospital. A few days later, the airline (I believe it was Northwest) called her and offered her $10,000 if she promised not to sue them. This, inspite of the fact that it was not their fault - she hadn't eaten anything on the plane.
- A partner in my brother-in-laws real estate firm took a client (a lawyer) out to look at houses. While they were driving, they got into a minor fender bender. 6 months later, the lawyer sued the real estate agent complaining of neck pain - inspite of the fact that a month after the accident the lawyer had fallen in her boat and broken her neck. His insurance company decided not to contest and settled for $150,000.

In both cases, the "plaintiff" was awarded/offered a undeserved large sum of money for something that was not the "defendants" fault. The reason? In most cases the cost of fighting the suit would be more than the settlement offered.

The tort reform we need is expediting the process and costs of tort suits rather than limiting the damages.

Here's something amazing my car doesn't do

[The_Rippa]

Here's something amazing my car doesn't do...it doesn't wrap itself around a tree while I try to check my email and read a fax at the same time.

Re:Wow... point and click parallel parking... COOL

[StevenHenderson]

To activate it, the driver first pulls alongside the forward vehicle, then drags a picture of a flag marker

...Sounds like Minesweeper. :)

Stop sueing everybody!

[SteroidMan]

Darn it, look at all the cool toys we could have if we would just take some personal responsibility for our actions.

Instead of adding, why not remove shit ?

[phoxix]

Lets start with those damn ultra-bright lights. Holy cow are those super annoying. I'm not even driving but walking down the streets with those suckers turned on is enough blind me.

Sunny Dubey

Re:Instead of adding, why not remove shit ?

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Xenon headlights are what he's talking about, and even properly adjusted they are a pain to have come around a corner at you with the brights on.

They're just TOO bright, and have become more of a "status" thing.. Much like wings, rims, and mufflers for ricers.

Paranoia

[fiannaFailMan]

Terrorism has also created a switch in what consumers deem to be necessary equipment as they drive. It is the ability to communicate, not to be entertained, that seems to matter most to Americans, some industry officials have concluded.

You know what? Please don't mod me troll, but do I wish USAians would get over this terror thing. Countries like the UK and Spain have had to put up with terrorism and the the threat of terrorism for decades, but they haven't developed a culture of fear, and it has not stopped them from getting on with their lives as normal. This 'but what would the terrorists think?' automatic reaction to just about everything is starting to get a bit old.

And another thing, I could have sworn that it was illegal in the UK to have a TV playing within view of the driver.

Re:Paranoia

[IncarnadineConor]

Do their leaders do everything in their power to reinforce the culture of fear?

Re:Paranoia

[Misch]

"We will not let fear be used as a weapon" - George W. Bush.

Notice he said nothing about "political tool"

Re:Paranoia

[Idarubicin]

I think it's a tad unrealistic to compare the terrorism in the UK and Spain (ignoring, perhaps, the recent train bombing in Spain) to the effects of Sept 11th. The US culture weathered the Oklahoma City bombing and the first WTC bombing in a reasonable fashion. Having four planes, the twin towers, a portion of the Pentagon, and a few other sundry buildings fall out of the sky and/or collapse is, and I'm going out on limb here, a rather more disturbing event than what Britain and Spain experienced over a few decades.

There's some good statistics on the UK's conflict with the IRA here. In all, more than 3500 were killed by military and paramilitary groups between 1969 and 2001. The peak death toll was in 1972, with 479 killed--that's about three Oklahoma City bombings (168 deaths in that incident). In six consecutive years (1971 to 1976) there were more deaths due to terrorism than were killed in Oklahoma city; four additional years had terrorism-related death tolls above a hundred. Between 1969 and 2001 there were no years in which there were no IRA-related deaths in the UK.

Two members of Parliament and two British Ambassadors have been killed by the IRA, and in 1984 there was a bombing attempt directed at the Prime Minister and her cabinet.

There is evidence that the IRA received funding, weapons, and other support from Libya and from the PLO at times in its history.

That's three decades of terrorism, with hundreds of people killed in some of those years. Tens of thousands of people injured, above and beyond the thousands of deaths I've listed here. Targeted bombings of politicians and judges. Yeah, it's different from what the States experienced--but I wouldn't be so quick to say one or the other was 'less disturbing'.

How many terrorist attacks did the United States have in 2003? In 2004? The British had bombings--multiple bombings--each year, every year, for decades.

Re:Paranoia

[kraut]

Counting attacks off against each other is a bit pointless. I think the key psychological difference was that 9/11 was completely unexpected.

For the American public, that is; apparently not for the intelligence services.

>There is evidence that the IRA received funding, weapons, and other support from Libya and from the PLO at times in its history.
Birds of a feather... Far more relevant is that the IRA for decaded received a lot of it's funding from Irish-Americans. Just goes to prove that one man's terrorist is (often) another man's freedom fighter.

Re::: fingers crossed ::

[Anonymous Coward]

What, you don't approve of autoeroticism?

Re:Video would be nice

[Martin Blank]

Urban legend.

More annoying than being regulated out...

[ivan256]

I just want the damned navigation system for my car. It's available in Europe and even Canada, but GM has decided that they'd rather sell OnStar in the US because it has a recurring revenue model, and that navigation systems interfere with OnStar premium subscriptions, so they decided not to offer the feature in the US.

The one thing I *don't* want is anything that requires a monthly fee. I'm sure I could come up with some choice words about where they can stick their recurring revenue.

Lawsuits

[slars]

This strongest point I got from reading the article (Yes, I actually RTFA!) is that auto makers, and probably many other companies, are hesitant to introduce new stuff to the US market, whether we need it or not or if it's stupid or not, for fear of being sued.

Our country has turned into a lawsuit machine. It's become too easy for Bubba to sue S&W and Coors for shooting himself in the foot after downing a 12-er or Coors Light. Who knows - he'd probably win.

Re:Video would be nice

[Anonymous Coward]

"here in the US, you can sue anybody for anything and stand a good chance of winning..."

Between 95 and 97 percent of all lawsuits filed end in settlement.

80% of all lawsuits are filed by businesses, not individuals. These suits are usually not brought because of their merit, but because they have some business purpose. For example, maybe someone wants to buy a piece of property for less than the offering price. They bring a suit against the party selling the property, that in some way casts the ownership of the property in doubt. Even though their suit is groundless, while the seller is waiting for the case to come up and be dismissed they can't sell the property. The plaintiff makes an offer for less than the property's worth, and the seller concedes. An attorney friend of mine handled just such a case.

We live in a litiginous society not because individuals sue others so readily, but because businesses use groundless or just-barely-justifiable lawsuits as weapons against their competition, and because lawyers love lucrative class-action suits. Dismiss the frivolous suits within days instead of months or years, and make class-action suits less lucrative for greedy lawyers, and a lot of these lawsuits would disappear.

Lawsuit as the Jackpot

[dpilot]

Has the lawsuit taken on some of the roll of a lottery in the US? Winning a lawsuit becomes like winning the Jackpot.

In the old days, you worked hard, and you got ahead. IMHO, that's no longer true, for the most part. You usually can't get ahead without working hard, but 'merely' hard work is no longer sufficient. More and more, it also takes connections an luck - being in the right place at the right time with the right idea. Furthermore, simply knowing how to build the better mousetrap isn't enough either, you have to also know how to market that mousetrap, or at least license its IP.

All in all, I suspect the American Dream is getting farther and farther away, for most Americans. Is the increasing number of state-run lotteries because of legal relaxations, or is it because more people are giving up on earning their way up, and figure their odds are about as good gambling their way up? Consider lawsuits in that light...

Re:Lawsuit as the Jackpot

[normal_guy]

You could never work hard your entire life as a coal miner and expect to get ahead. Connections, personality, and motivation have always been the hallmarks of those able to move up a rung. Many people still invent things then sell the patent to a corporation. Lotteries have always been around. People want to spend a few bucks for a chance to win a few million. Laws have relaxed because they're huge revenue draws for the state.

This Office Space philosophy smacks of wage slave desperation. There has always been a working class - and the need to claw your way up the way everyone else has, by buying a nice suit and playing golf with the boss once in awhile. Lawsuit-lotteries or no, there will always be those looking for the easy way out.

Slashdot user != USA resident

[sicking]

I'm not living in the US you insensitive clod! My Automobile will be able to do those things!

Re:good!

[Eccles]

i dont want the people passing me watching TV while they're driving.

The European system shuts off if the car is going more than 3 MPH. If you're getting passed by someone going 3 MPH, perhaps you should just pedal your Big Wheel a bit faster?

Re:Video would be nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Check your rear view mirror, you tv watching, erraticly swerving, lane changing, brake hitting mother fucker. Often times the worst drivers ARE NOT IN ACCIDENTS,
its those of us trying to get out of your way because you are too concerned with the tv, phone, kids, makeup to drive from point A to point B.

Discrimination!

[TiggertheMad]

You read those comments by the Europeans in the article! Inflamitory! They are suggestiong that, we Americans, are irate little hot heads that would litigate for trifiling nusances. I won't stand for it, I'm going to sue them for slander!

...uh..never mind....

Re:legal liability prevents innovation

[nigelc]

Taking responsiblity for your inventions is a bitch

and taking responsibility for your own actions is even more of a bitch.

Oh sorry, I guess that's un-American these days.