|
02-01-2020, 05:49 PM | #45 | |
Colonel
1215
Rep 2,404
Posts |
Quote:
Everything has some type of vulnerability, and people will always try to find a way to exploit it. That doesn't mean a product isn't ready for the market. P. S. That same spoof would mess with adaptive cruise control on a BMW as well. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 05:54 PM | #46 | |
Captain
3579
Rep 885
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 05:57 PM | #47 | |
Colonel
5951
Rep 2,017
Posts |
Quote:
The only automaker that I know of that has bundled all these SAFETY features and called it Autopilot is Tesla. You are assuming that people are eating shit BECAUSE they have safety features. If we are going to go off anecdotal evidence then I see a shiton of people in shit boxes that sure as hell have none of those safety features eating shit on their phone. Maybe I spot those more often because they are driving more erratically than the shit eaters who do have the safety features. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 06:00 PM | #48 | |
Captain
3579
Rep 885
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 06:05 PM | #49 | |
Colonel
1215
Rep 2,404
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 06:06 PM | #50 | |
Colonel
5951
Rep 2,017
Posts |
Quote:
Now your posts make sense. Don't worry old man, the robo cars won't be driving on your lawn anytime soon. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 06:12 PM | #51 | |
Captain
3579
Rep 885
Posts |
Quote:
Last edited by Salty Dog; 02-01-2020 at 06:33 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-01-2020, 07:18 PM | #52 | |
Colonel
5951
Rep 2,017
Posts |
Quote:
Luckily we have the freedom to use as much or as little tech as we want. |
|
Appreciate
1
Salty Dog3578.50 |
02-01-2020, 07:33 PM | #53 |
Lieutenant General
11727
Rep 11,191
Posts |
|
02-07-2020, 02:47 PM | #54 |
Emperor
1616
Rep 2,764
Posts |
Yes, the E-Tron sucks. The strategy of taking a ICE platform and converting it into an EV results in half assed products. True for Audi, true for most of BMW’s products.
__________________
2005 M3 Coupe, 2004 M3 Wagon, 2001 M5 Sedan, 2008 M5 6MT Sedan, 2012 128i M sport |
Appreciate
0
|
02-07-2020, 03:14 PM | #55 |
Private First Class
164
Rep 164
Posts |
In life, the things that you don't know about are the ones that get you.
When you are traveling at speed in a vehicle weighing thousands of pounds, the things that you don't see are the ones that can kill you. I don't think its controversial to assert that most deadly accidents were caused by factors unknown to the driver. When you are discussing activities that can end with you getting killed, you don't get a second chance, so it makes sense to eliminate every risk that you can, especially the ones that are easy to eliminate. Why would I put my life in the hands of a factor that I cannot control nor see, especially when it is known that companies including Tesla and Uber have proven that they are perfectly willing to test unknown risks in their software on unsuspecting humans - thereby resulting in death: Ramming into a big rig in the former case (which was not recognized by the software) and ramming into a pedestrian in the latter (which was recognized in plenty of time to react but then judged by the software as an object that the car did not need to avoid). In other words, those making the executive decisions at those companies decided that their pursuit was a higher priority than a certain amount of deaths. If you all want to be a party to that because "it hasn't happened enough for me to worry about it" be my guest. I'd rather put my life into my own hands every time because I can see and control all the factors. You might argue "but there will be less deaths overall", let's just assume for sake of argument that is true, the problem is that doesn't map one bit to the individual. Would you sacrifice your life if you were guaranteed that in trade 2000 other lives would be saved? Let's even discount the fact that they are being saved from their own otherwise life-ending bad decisions. I would not take that trade and I suspect virtually no one else would. Trading a few deaths to save many more is an insane game especially when it was completely unnecessary. It was done because they believed they could get away with skipping testing in a safe environment even if they killed a few people, and they were right. They could have made the choice to develop the car's automation to emphasize safety over everything else, they could have made it slow down when confidence is low, they could have tested in environments that do not risk life, but they decided their rapid success was far more important. Think about that. For their part Google seems to be far more careful in their testing and far less reckless from what I have heard. |
Appreciate
2
Viffermike1759.50 Salty Dog3578.50 |
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|