Hacker News Reader

Comment by sadness2 | Hacker News Reader

I would be willing to pay a premium for a car with no integrated circuits.

New cars in the USA (and many other countries) are required to have safety features like antilock brakes, electronic stability control, tire pressure monitoring, and backup cameras. Autonomous emergency braking looks like it will be next.

It seems like it would be exceedingly difficult (and/or expensive) to build a legal mass-produced car which has all of these safety features, using no ICs.

Early ABS implementations were mechanical. Ball bearings were involved, can't remember what else, but it was 50-50 what would be the winning the market.

Saloons of yesteryear were possible to park without backup cameras, driving instructors taught you how to look behind through the back window and you could see out the back then if the kids ducked down. It was easy for them to do so as they had no safety belts.

I think no ICs is a bit silly. However, I would like a car that was simplified in the extreme. This does not mean a 1990's or a 1970's car but something more ambitious. The simplifications I want to see are things like parts that can be swapped to left/right or front/rear. So one seat design, one bumper design, one indicator light design, one side mirror design and so on. Also I would want a carbon fibre shell that has no crumple zones, instead the seats slide forward/back to absorb the energy.

The thing would have to be fully EV with no frunk/boot, just have 3-4 foot of legroom in the back and more like a VW van of old with a cab forward design that is entered like a cockpit, so just one side door each side to the central area.

> It was easy for them to do so as they had no safety belts

It was also easier before increased crash safety requirements caused the C pillars to grow massively in size, robbing us of rear window size

I don't think you actually want that though--that would require a return to points for ignition and either carburetor or mechanical fuel injection.

Also likely a generator instead of an alternator, most alternators use ICs for regulation. Having dealt with these systems, I actively convert older vehicles to alternator & electronic ignition to improve the reliability. No ICs would mean the need for a tuneup multiple times per year, vs. modern cars that only require oil changes for regular maintenance.

I sort of share that sentiment, but in the extreme version that would mean no anti-lock brakes and no airbags, wouldn't it?

Do you mean a brand new car?

There are older cars available that are in better condition than when they were new - but they won't meet today's safety and economy standards.

New cars can be physically safer but are vulnerable to an increasing number of other "virtual" things that wouldn't even be a concern for something much older --- like a remote attacker hacking into and taking control over the Internet, EMP, etc.

There are almost 100 traffic fatalities a day in the US. The number of crashes caused by hacking or EMP is approximately 0. Until such time as these theoretical attacks become a real issue, I'll take my modern crash safety improvements.

Same, it's a lot cheaper to repair and probably safer overall since people can't drive by and take over it through the bluetooth stack.

None? I doubt you'd be able to meet modern fuel economy requirements without an ECU.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com