Slashdot Mirror
Auto Safety Tech May Encourage Dangerous Driving
longacre writes "Modern highway planning schemes designed to make roads safer combined with the comfort and safety technology found in the modern automobile may actually be putting us in danger, according to a compelling piece in Popular Mechanics. Citing studies and anecdotal evidence, the article points out that a driver on a narrow mountain road will probably drive as if their life depends on it; but the same driver on an eight-lane freeway with gradual curves and little traffic may be lulled into speeding while chatting on his cellphone. Quoting: 'Modern cars are quiet, powerful and capable of astonishing grip in curves, even on wet pavement. That's swell, of course, until you suddenly lose traction at 75 mph. The sense of confidence bred by all this capability makes us feel safe, which causes us to drive faster than we probably should. We don't want to make cars with poor response, but perhaps we could design cues — steering-wheel vibration devices, as in video games? — that make us feel less safe at speed and encourage more care. ... In college I drove an Austin-Healey 3000 that somehow felt faster at 45 mph than my Mazda RX-8 (or even my Toyota Highlander Hybrid) feels at 75 mph. That was a good thing.'"
I drove an MG for several years and became a better driver for it. And "driver" is the word. People nowadays expect their automobiles to be living rooms on wheels so it is no wonder they don't have a sense of "road feel". This is the same psychology that attempts to hide from airline passengers the fact you're in an airplane. Compare riding in a small plane to an airliner. The modern airliner is as close to not flying as you can get. We spend an inordinate amount of time watching, using and living in machines.
This is a well known effect known as "Risk Compensation" (Wikipedia). The most famous study showing the effect was on a fleet of taxis in Munich equipped with Anti-Lock Brake System (ABS).
The problem here isn't improvements in technology but rather user expectations. This should be a familiar problem to almost everyone here. What's amazing about this is that there are so many drivers on the road with little or no formal training, there aren't more accidents. These are people who are routinely lulled into a sense of security because they repeatedly engage in dangerous behavior without consequences. Well, what's the natural, human, thing to do when you do something a hundred times without ill-effect? You assume it's safe. You've driven with that 64 oz big gulp between your legs, a cheeseburger propped up on your leg, fries in the cup holder, while talking to a friend in the next seat doing the same thing how many times? Too many to count. And you haven't been in an accident. It's precisely this erosion of standards that leads to accidents, and the ONLY -- and I repeat ONLY -- way to safeguard against it is routine training.
Which is the one thing nobody will ever agree to, because they think driving is a right, not a priviledge. Afterall, it's all those other jerks that are causing problems, not me, right? Just like how something like 90% of drivers think they're "above average", huh. If you want to solve the accident rate problem, the solution is training and certification by a competent authority and stiff punishments for non-compliance with those standards. Hard pill to swallow though, as entrenched as the automobile is in our culture and the sense of entitlement -- even repeat DUI offenders insist they should have their license.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
...are the bane of my existence. I used to have a '94 Grand Am, and the ABS control chip failed in it-- a failure which manifested itself in a particularly terrifying way: Occasionally when I would attempt to apply the brake, the pedal would go straight to the floor and not actually activate the brakes. At all. I'd have to quickly take my foot off and reapply. Luckily it never happened in a situation where I would have had to slam on the brakes to avoid a collision. You can bet your ass I got that little problem fixed in a hurry, because there's no feeling like stepping on the pedal and finding that the brakes aren't fucking there.
Now, I drive a Scion Xa with what can only be called an overzealous ABS. If I'm braking and happen to hit a pothole or bump hard enough, the ABS is triggered and suddenly my stopping distance is not going to be less than the distance to the bumper of the car in front of me. Once again, the solution is to quickly take my foot off and then reapply. I have had to learn where the trouble spots are on the roads I frequent and brake very carefully when approaching them, always ready to lift my foot and then brake again if necessary.
I kinda wish ABS was something that could be toggled by the driver... it has its uses, but IME it's been more of a pain in the ass than a lifesaver.
~Philly
55 is not the answer for safety. Both the roads and cars are designed to safely handle faster traffic. Also, for true interstate travel, I would argue 55 is actually more dangerous. If someone is taking a long trip, the more time it takes, the more fatigued they will become and the more dangerous they will be behind the wheel. If you can cut two to three hours off their trip, they will be more alert and a safer driver. It might also mean the difference between not getting enough sleep prior to the trip or not. The biggest safety issue with highway speeds is lack of conformity. The people that choose to drive 45 because they feel safer actually imped and endanger other drivers. Everyone just needs to go with the flow -- not excessively faster or slower. Traffic enforcement needs to go after both cases.
You miss my point. The feel of a modern car is different than the feel of an older car. The problem is that people who have driven older cars (myself included), need to get used to the feedback of newer cars.
Rather than adapting the cars with tech to make them mimic old cars, why don't we focus on people getting used to the new feedback model?
Seriously, this is nothing new in cars... for a hundred years, the feeling of 'danger' at high speeds has been decreasing... often because the danger has actually been reduced (shock absorbers, better tires, etc). Let's not step in the way of the natural progession just because there is a learning curve for people to get used to the feedback of newer cars.
Instead of artificially inducing steering wheel vibration, etc, why not disable all car radios and keep people from closing their windows fully? Or how about just a dashboard light that lights up when some algorith determines that there is too much slippage, or something?
Personally, I know the limits of my car because I'm an experienced driver. I know what speed is safe in different conditions, for my tires, since I bothered to read the specs and have bothered to push the limits of my car on a closed course, and for sake of caution, keep my speed well below what I would consider to be the safe threshold.
I think this idea of adding in fake feedback mechanisms is yet another way we encourage people to be intellectually lazy, and I don't like it.
YMMV.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
No, not at all. The lesson that if you hide the risks from people, they tend to make more risky decisions.
Rather than simply cushioning people from the risks in their environment, they need to be made aware of them and their consequences.
Anyway, geeks? Football? Going outside to play? That's crazy talk! :-)
You laugh, but this same point was made in the excellent book, The Armchair Economist by Steven Landsburg. In the first chapter, The Power of Incentives: How Seat Belts Kill, he questions whether the additional safety equipment really translates into an overall improvement in safety and demonstrates part of his argument by having us imagine driving a car w/o seat belts and with a sharp metal spike protruding from the steering wheel aimed at your chest. It's hard to deny you would drive very, very carefully in that situation. Safety equipment gives the driver increased confidence to take higher risks. I have a friend who says he considers seatbelts a performance option. I suspect a lot of drivers think the same (subconsciously).
Move it to the rear bumbler and you've got yourself a deal.
I've never, ever understood why some morons insist on driving half a meter behind me, even on otherwise empty roads. The so-called "professional drivers" are the worst of this lot, especially if they're driving a truck or a bus that's guaranteed to not stop as fast as me. Are they simply bloodthirsty, or is there some kind of rational reason for it?
There's a device in these vehicles that keeps records of the speed they've been going. We need to add a radar which keeps track of the distance between a truck and the car on front; if the distance is consistently less than 20 meters - which is far too close in almost any situation, BTW - it should be grounds for compulsory and permanent loss of driving license.
Cue a hundred butthurt truck drivers posting that they are professionals and know what they're doing. And of course they do: they're deliberately and in cold blood endangering my life to shave a half a second off of a few hours journey, since that makes them half a penny more.
That's one thing that seems to never get emphasized. I've been told that I am overreactive because I do not allow people to tailgate me. I will gently tap my brake lights a couple of times to ask them to back off. Then I'll give them a moment to see what they do. If they don't take the hint, I start slowing down until one of two things happens: they realize I'm not going to be a pushover and they back off, or, I match the speed to their following distance since they refuse to match their following distance to the speed. I'm not trying to replace one tyrant with another, so if they get the message and stop tailgating me I will speed up again.
The situation is just as you describe. They are willing to endanger your life because they wish to intimidate you into submitting to them and giving them what they want. That I've been called overreactive for my refusal to accept this amuses me. Considering that they are needlessly endangering me, I think my reaction is quite mild. I respond to them the way that I do because I used to get quite upset about it and have since then decided that there is a better way. Having said that, I really believe that anyone who does things like willfully and needlessly endangering others should be considered "fair game" and has no right to complain about anything that happens to them as a result.
Like most other aberrations, there's a million excuses for this, too. The bottom line is quite simple. Tailgaters are bullies and a wise person does not reward a bully by giving them what they want. Every time you cave in and appease a bully, you are sending the message that their behavior is acceptable and will be rewarded with the result they desire. I think this shit is so widespread because people have largely forgotten these basic things.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
I don't need evidence. I've witnessed first hand just how incredibly stupid and/or oblivious so many drivers are. I've been through 11 major collisions, 9 of them total losses on my part. Two of them were my fault (one of those was a technicality - I didn't have right of way but the van that hit me came speeding around a corner whilst I was already in the intersection - it was not visible when I entered said intersection).
I am an idiot driver magnet. One of my favorite ones was the 90 year old lady who though she could cross 5 lanes of high speed traffic from one parking lot to another without bothering to look first. After I managed to get what was left of my car off the road, I ran out to see if she was OK. She was, but the first thing she asked me was "Did you see who hit me?". Thankfully, I got more back from the insurance company then I'd payed for that car.
The one that pissed me off the most was a woman who, stopped at a stop sign that entered into a state road, managed to wait until all traffic passed by in front of her except for me. Once I was squarely in her sights (as in, directly in front of her), she slammed on the gas and managed to total the only nice vehicle I'd ever dared to buy. This was in broad daylight, and I had my headlights on just in case: I was highly visible.
It's not the speeders and assholes you have to watch out for; stay out of their way and they'll stay out of yours. It's the ones who can't pick a lane, brake when going down hills, and get confused at 4-way stops. Above all, it's the ones that just don't pay attention. Making the vehicles safer isn't any help in this regard. Making the driving tests stricter will go a long way, though.
I've been aware of this effect for two decades, and it's all about an absence of feedback from car to driver. Think about the feedback that you get as a "driver" when you ride a bicycle: the faster you want to move, the harder you have to work physically and the greater the feedback you get from both the bicycle and your own muscles.
That is precisely what is missing in modern cars. Not only is there no physical work involved - we now even have power steering, power windows, power everything - but the engine is largely silent at all speeds, the tires don't hum, the shocks are quiet; the interior is like a virtual womb.
The last vehicle I drove, for 14 years, was a 1989 Mercury Tracer (which had the same engine as a Mazda 323). I miss that little vehicle for the degree of feedback that it gave me as the driver: the engine actually made noise and vibration that increased as I drive faster, etc. Even though I still don't drive a "luxury car" by any means, I don't get that so much since then. Fortunately I still have what you might call muscle memory of the Tracer.
If we REALLY want to make cars safer, AND teach people to use fuel more wisely, then vehicles should be made much more an extension of our physical bodies; there should be some tangible or physical consequence and feedback from driving faster or driving recklessly.