Adaptive cruise control is dangerous

[moog]

"Pilot error."

Learn and understand how to "fly the plane".

ACC is not dangerous, you as a driver are the dangerous part.
READ YOUR OWNER'S MANUAL


Some people are just not qualified for certain automations.
Makes you wonder how they mastered the two pedal and steering wheel operations alone.

Sponsored

 

[Teslaeata]

In my IT world we call those a PICNIC (Problem In Chair, Not In Computer)

Thought it was an IDtenT error ?

 

[Mach1E]

Thought it was an IDtenT error ?

I heard a new one, at least to me recently:

SPORES:
Stupid People on Rental Equipment

 

[stoopid]

Yup I made a thread about this too: https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/how-reliable-is-adaptive-cruise-control.46475/

And in that thread you conflated adaptive cruise with lane keep assist, and were using both in an attempt to (unsafely) drive the car for you like it was full autonomous. That might be something you don't want to draw attention to, unless you're Dunning Kruger-ing in front of the entire forum.

 

[raijinmach]

And in that thread you conflated adaptive cruise with lane keep assist, and were using both in an attempt to (unsafely) drive the car for you like it was full autonomous. That might be something you don't want to draw attention to, unless you're Dunning Kruger-ing in front of the entire forum.

Relax. I never said the car as a whole sucked. I do think it's dangerous that it can miss detecting an entire cement block on a curving road regardless of how I was using it.

 

[Jimrpa]

Relax. I never said the car as a whole sucked. I do think it's dangerous that it can miss detecting an entire cement block on a curving road regardless of how I was using it.

Question: can you miss detecting an entire cement block on a curving road, assuming you aren’t using any factory-equipped ADAS that is user-overrideable?

 

[raijinmach]

Question: can you miss detecting an entire cement block on a curving road, assuming you aren’t using any factory-equipped ADAS that is user-overrideable?

If I wasn't watching the road, yes, but the sensors in the car are designed to watch the road at all times. Is it perfect? No, but that's the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Jimrpa]

If I wasn't watching the road, yes, but the sensors in the car are designed to watch the road at all times. Is it perfect? No, but that's the point I'm trying to make.

Exactly. Which is sort of my point. These systems are not 100% dependable and rely on humans to be paying attention to the driving environment.

 

[raijinmach]

Exactly. Which is sort of my point. These systems are not 100% dependable and rely on humans to be paying attention to the driving environment.

I mean if humans can miss detecting cement blocks as you said, I am not sure why the system is relying on a human then.

 

[Jimrpa]

I mean if humans can miss detecting cement blocks as you said, I am not sure why the system is relying on a human then.

Because it’s not infallible. It needs a human.

 

[raijinmach]

Because it’s not infallible. It needs a human.

That's fine, I'm just saying that your previous question asking if I ever make a mistake doesn't really address the problem that the machine makes mistakes.

 

[AnimalChin]

confucius say "When IT workers see men of a contrary character, IT workers should turn inwards and examine themselves"

In IT we refer to these issues as 'end user error'. Have you tried turning it off and back on again?

 

[Mach1E]

If I wasn't watching the road, yes, but the sensors in the car are designed to watch the road at all times. Is it perfect? No, but that's the point I'm trying to make.

When you’re saying “a cement block,” do you mean one of these in the road?

If so, I don’t think our system is designed for that.

The system is designed to work WITH the driver, not replace the driver.

It’s basically adaptive cruise plus lane keep assist.

The reason it forces the driver to keep their eyes on the road is for things like the above.

I imagine any system designed to see an object that small in the road would result in tons of phantom braking when it thinks it sees something dangerous…… but it’s just a plastic bag or dip in the road etc.

 

[Jimrpa]

When you’re saying “a cement block,” do you mean one of these in the road?

If so, I don’t think our system is designed for that.

The system is designed to work WITH the driver, not replace the driver.

It’s basically adaptive cruise plus lane keep assist.

The reason it forces the driver to keep their eyes on the road is for things like the above.

I imagine any system designed to see an object that small in the road would result in tons of phantom braking when it thinks it sees something dangerous…… but it’s just a plastic bag or dip in the road etc.

I interpreted them as speaking metaphorically. The “cement block” could be a dead Tesla for example ?

 

[Snakebitten]

It wouldn't be difficult to convince me that a Mach-E, or my fully dolled up Powerboost, or any other driver assist loaded current model vehicle suddenly did something driver-assist related that I wasn't expecting.
And I do admit that my GTPE and Powerboost both are capable of amazing acceleration compared to almost every vehicle I have owned in my ~70 years on the planet.

But having said that, I'm a little surprised at the various posts describing vehicles reaching 15mph beyond my assumption (65 vs 50), or "90 mph" before I realized and intervened.

I'm a big fan of all this technology laden driving. It's fascinating to me, in fact. But I don't see myself disengaged enough for the vehicle to accelerate THAT far beyond my assumptions. Enough to crash into the vehicle I'm following?

Occasional quirks, I have experienced.
But runaway Christine? It doesn't get enough rope to pull that off.

Sponsored