Hacker News Reader

Comment by lvass | Hacker News Reader

So all cars will be susceptible to "phantom braking" due to a bug or worse? I really dislike this, and living in the third world I can already imagine fake road signs being used to decelerate and rob cars.

View on HN

I'm not sure why this is the consistent take. We have e-scooters and bikes with limiters on speed, why would this be materially different than cars?

It's not like it needs to slam on the brake, it just needs to disengage acceleration past a certain speed. This isn't new grounds for tech and it is _currently_ deployed on our streets.

I'm not sure what the panic over this is, if anything this is a good thing - why should passenger vehicles go 200+ km/h anyways? Why isn't a more reasonable limit imposed, for cars that spend 99% of their time in an urban centre? What actual road is engineered to even support that kind of speed?

The limits on ebikes are to prevent battery and motor overheating and catching fire.

And the limits that could be imposed on cars are to prevent people from crashing and killing others and exceeding the speed limit.

I don't see the difference, they're both valid reasons to reduce speed.

Because I tell machines what to do. I don't take orders from a computer.

It is not an order. You tell it what to do and it responds with: "No". To the benefit of the rest of us who have to live with what you "tell" to machines.

It’s not even that it says “no”, in most cases it will be you tell it what to do and it does that while flashing a light on the dashboard to indicate that it may be illegal

The orders come from humans and the machine is informing you that you are breaking the law.

No they are purely regulatory. Most S pedelects are just pedelecs whose software limit was unlocked.

Absolutely incorrect at least in Australia, they are entirely to manage speed in pedestrian areas.

and violating local laws

Let's do a joke where we go on the highway, and some people in the back pull out a painted sign with (30). Camera of the car behind you detects it and breaks. I can see such shenanigans happening.

You seem to think that car manufacturers are extremely stupid

No I think that AI roadsign recognition is extremely stupid.

Thus you can assume it won't be relied on or its flaws will be adequately mitigated.

One of the most important things I learned during my short 43 years of life: Assumption is the mother of all fuckups.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg4trPZFUwc

I live in a dictatorship where we have military road stops everywhere.

Screw these features.

Sounds like having the theoretical ability to disobey those stops and drive super-fast through them will buy you very little. That's a kind of freedom you only get to exercise once in your life.

I imagine it would work by GPS (at least in Europe the speed limit of most roads can even be displayed in google maps).

Also: your motor/brakes are likely already controlled by software. Whether a speed limit is bolted onto that software or not doesn't make a lot of difference.

> So all cars will be susceptible to "phantom braking" due to a bug or worse?

No, there’s no requirement to connect the ISA system to the brakes or throttle

Where do you see that in the article? It doesn’t mention anything about braking.

> When ISA detects the car is over the limit, it may induce visual and audible warnings, as well as haptic feedback through the steering wheel or throttle pedal, or it may begin accelerating the vehicle if no action is taken.

The article wasn’t very clear around this, but it’s not that every car must have automatic deceleration, it’s one way out of four car makers may implement this:

> The ISA regulation provides four options for systems feedback to the driver, from which car manufacturers will be free to choose from:

> • Cascaded acoustic warning

> • Cascaded vibrating warning

> • Haptic feedback through the acceleration pedal

> • Speed control function

https://road-safety-charter.ec.europa.eu/resources-knowledge...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com