Hacker News Reader

Comment by taeric | Hacker News Reader

I mean, I can certainly agree that there is a thing as regulatory capture. I am not clear that this is it, though. Making cars safer has legit improved life expectancy. Anti-lock brakes, seat belts, rear view cameras, blind spot indicators, etc. are all very welcome advances that make modern vehicles much more safe than they would otherwise be.

View on HN

All of the safety devices you mention were bought by many consumers before they were required by regulations. Why? Because they are obvious benefits with no real downside. In fact, the only reason regulators were able to require things like anti-lock brakes and seat belts on all cars was that the vast majority of cars already had them, because the vast majority of drivers already recognized their benefits. They didn't need regulators to tell them.

The systems under discussion here are different, because they have the capability to do something that none of the other safety systems you mention can: take control of your car from you. Anti-lock brakes only work when you press the brake pedal. Seat belts and rear view cameras are passive. Automatic systems that can press the brakes without warning and without you expecting it are very different; what if the system makes a mistake? Multiple other posters in this thread have described such mistakes.

These systems are more like rudimentary self-driving cars and should be judged accordingly. They are not just passive safety features with no downside.

The car industry fought seatbelts and airbags.

https://www.nytimes.com/1975/04/06/archives/industry-resists...

Your claims about widespread voluntary adoption appear false.

https://www.history.com/news/seat-belt-laws-resistance

> At the time, only 14 percent of Americans regularly wore seat belts, even though the federal government required lap and shoulder belts in all new cars starting in 1968.

What percentage of Americans who did not wear seat belts suffered or caused harm because of it?

Enough? Consensus appears to be 300-400k people saved since 1975. Charting motor vehicle deaths against miles driven reveals a stark improvement in mortality as vehicle safety improved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...

> Consensus appears to be 300-400k people saved since 1975.

I don't see where that number is given in the article you referenced.

In any case, I didn't ask for a number, I asked for a percentage of people who didn't wear seat belts who suffered or caused harm because of it.

> I don't see where that number is given in the article you referenced.

It's not hard to find. https://www.bankrate.com/insurance/car/seat-belt-statistics/ is an example claiming 329,715.

> In any case, I didn't ask for a number, I asked for a percentage of people who didn't wear seat belts who suffered or caused harm because of it.

Yes, I did notice that, and the not so subtle sleight of hand involved in it.

> the not so subtle sleight of hand

If you think that was sleight of hand, we obviously have very different attitudes about risk and regulation and we probably won't be able to have a productive discussion.

Emergency services and social costs of crashes are immense.

> The car industry fought seatbelts and airbags.

But, as far as I can tell from the article, the industry is not fighting this regulation.

The parent post claimed they and the American public voluntarily opted for seat belts and airbags, which as far as I can tell was a falsehood. It is a response to that claim.

As a sibling post said, this is not that accurate, all told. I specifically remember similar argument against anti-lock brakes when those were first made.

To your credit, I have never heard anyone say bad things about rear view cameras. It is scary how many lives that has to have saved by now.

Now, I have heard complaints on cruise control. I don't see that going away any time soon.

AFAIK cruise control is not a regulatory requirement.

I can see how I muddied that. My point is I have heard complaints from cruise control accidents. If anything, I would expect regulation against cruise control.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com