[Thunderhorse]

I get it, people don't want to get in wrecks and look for ways around them. That's why we have stuff in new vehicles like the radar sensors that enable adaptive cruise control and automatic braking, and lane departure and blind spot monitoring. It seems to me that this year in particular, there has been more technology researched, released, and tested than ever before; all trending towards self driving cars (picture the Johnny-cab from Total Recall).

http://blog.caranddriver.com/feds-w...n-new-cars-starting-in-2021/?src=socialflowFB

But at what point do you think the government will have gone too far? I am sure I will get responses ranging from "TPMS was already too far" to "I wouldn't mind a self driving vehicle." I think there is a good compromise between technology and simplicity, but it is getting to the point of being ridiculous.

Here is my take: I do not oppose this technology wholesale, however I do oppose it being government mandated. I believe these technologies are crutches for idiots who are too distracted by their phones to pay attention to driving, or drunks who do indeed cause a lot of accidents. Neither of these cases warrants a federal mandate IMHO because they are both preventable, these technologies just encourage irresponsibility and assist people in getting away with it.

Additionally, what will be the base price of vehicles in the future? I remember as a kid you could get the cheapest cars for under $10,000 and a decently equipped compact under $20k. In this context, it seems that within the past decade or so $30,000 has become the new $20,000 as a target point for budgeting for a vehicle; even accounting for inflation the price of vehicles has skyrocketed. This is largely due to the increased amount of technology, and while I am not opposed to its availability for those willing and able to pay for it, I am opposed to making people pay for it on even the most basic of models. Even in nominal terms, how many of you ever thought that there would be pickups costing $70,000, especially some of you older guys-and some of you may have bought such trucks. I remember when dad bought his Ram for $27-$28,000, it was the most he'd ever paid for a vehicle in his life and he had some second thoughts (this was a well equipped SLT in 2009). Fast forward to the present and the least I've paid for a vehicle was $27,500-and it was a used base model Durango which, ironically does not have blind spot warning or any of this yet-to be mandated technology; though by standards of a decade ago it would rival top trim vehicles in options. I would love to get a Challenger as a 3rd vehicle someday, but have decided that I will probably just get a Ramcharger because with the way prices are trending I will never be able to afford a Challenger as prices rise.

It seems to me that this will eventually result in the federal mandate of self driving cars, at which point 1) vehicles will become no more than an appliance and 2) private vehicle ownership will come to an end. Why own a car if you are just using it to travel to a pre-programmed destination? Why create unnecessary emissions by taking your own car when there are as many people going to your destination as there are seats in the car?

All-electric vehicles will not replace ICEs for the for the foreseeable future because the only way to generate the amount of electricity required to power everyone's vehicular transportation requirements is through nuclear power. However the same proponents of all electric vehicles are the same ones promoting solar, wind, and other low-yield means of energy production; and they are generally opposed to nuclear energy despite the fact that it is actually very clean. Until these people can reconcile their philosophical dichotomy, private ownership of all electric vehicles will be impossible on the scale it is today. I think this will lead the government to outlaw or tax beyond the means of the majority, vehicles powered by "unclean" fuels, also leading to self driving, public transportation cars for most of us. Exceptions may be made for commercial trucks that need to haul long distances until battery technology enables them to drive as far as necessary with such heavy loads and without a recharge.

I did not mean to make this too political, only to voice my thoughts.

 

[GTyankee]

TPMS is mandated by the Feds & i can't understand why

Soon backup cameras will be required by the Feds, i think they will be required in 2018
Automatic Braking is the next big thing, wait until you have to pay for that computer & sensors !!
Now they are talking about Lane Departure & Blind Spot Radar
Blind Spot Radar will be a detraction when they move barricades over in road construction zones

 

[gofishn]

I get it, people don't want to get in wrecks and look for ways around them. That's why we have stuff in new vehicles like the radar sensors that enable adaptive cruise control and automatic braking, and lane departure and blind spot monitoring. It seems to me that this year in particular, there has been more technology researched, released, and tested than ever before; all trending towards self driving cars (picture the Johnny-cab from Total Recall).

http://blog.caranddriver.com/feds-w...n-new-cars-starting-in-2021/?src=socialflowFB

But at what point do you think the government will have gone too far? I am sure I will get responses ranging from "TPMS was already too far" to "I wouldn't mind a self driving vehicle." I think there is a good compromise between technology and simplicity, but it is getting to the point of being ridiculous.

Here is my take: I do not oppose this technology wholesale, however I do oppose it being government mandated. I believe these technologies are crutches for idiots who are too distracted by their phones to pay attention to driving, or drunks who do indeed cause a lot of accidents. Neither of these cases warrants a federal mandate IMHO because they are both preventable, these technologies just encourage irresponsibility and assist people in getting away with it.

Additionally, what will be the base price of vehicles in the future? I remember as a kid you could get the cheapest cars for under $10,000 and a decently equipped compact under $20k. In this context, it seems that within the past decade or so $30,000 has become the new $20,000 as a target point for budgeting for a vehicle; even accounting for inflation the price of vehicles has skyrocketed. This is largely due to the increased amount of technology, and while I am not opposed to its availability for those willing and able to pay for it, I am opposed to making people pay for it on even the most basic of models. Even in nominal terms, how many of you ever thought that there would be pickups costing $70,000, especially some of you older guys-and some of you may have bought such trucks. I remember when dad bought his Ram for $27-$28,000, it was the most he'd ever paid for a vehicle in his life and he had some second thoughts (this was a well equipped SLT in 2009). Fast forward to the present and the least I've paid for a vehicle was $27,500-and it was a used base model Durango which, ironically does not have blind spot warning or any of this yet-to be mandated technology; though by standards of a decade ago it would rival top trim vehicles in options. I would love to get a Challenger as a 3rd vehicle someday, but have decided that I will probably just get a Ramcharger because with the way prices are trending I will never be able to afford a Challenger as prices rise.

It seems to me that this will eventually result in the federal mandate of self driving cars, at which point 1) vehicles will become no more than an appliance and 2) private vehicle ownership will come to an end. Why own a car if you are just using it to travel to a pre-programmed destination? Why create unnecessary emissions by taking your own car when there are as many people going to your destination as there are seats in the car?

All-electric vehicles will not replace ICEs for the for the foreseeable future because the only way to generate the amount of electricity required to power everyone's vehicular transportation requirements is through nuclear power. However the same proponents of all electric vehicles are the same ones promoting solar, wind, and other low-yield means of energy production; and they are generally opposed to nuclear energy despite the fact that it is actually very clean. Until these people can reconcile their philosophical dichotomy, private ownership of all electric vehicles will be impossible on the scale it is today. I think this will lead the government to outlaw or tax beyond the means of the majority, vehicles powered by "unclean" fuels, also leading to self driving, public transportation cars for most of us. Exceptions may be made for commercial trucks that need to haul long distances until battery technology enables them to drive as far as necessary with such heavy loads and without a recharge.

I did not mean to make this too political, only to voice my thoughts.

It is quite simple, really.

America is the Economic engine, for the rest of the world.

In order to raise the Worlds Economy, and thus the overall standard of Living, for Everyone, America must invent/develop/mass produce each and every next great thing.

Since no company goes out of it's way to add to costs, all of this must be legislated. Once legislated, it is forced upon Manufacturers, eventually trickling down to end consumer. Since it s a legislated, Must-have, For-all & Every kind of thing, costs eventually come down to the point that the rest of the world can afford to join in too.

Only flaw in all of this, which has been going on since the American Industrial Revolution, is that the American consumer no longer has the disposable income they once did, nor the savings, and all the jobs that provided for those incomes , are now overseas.

Then again, maybe I'm just feeling Grumpy today . . . .

 

[striker2237]

To far is at any point ANY system on the car can be accessed or communicate to anything outside of the car.

Hell, I prefer each sub system to be totally stand alone so no errors in one system have any chance of spilling over to others. I demand all 100% physical connections to the engine, brakes, and steering. No drive/brake/steer by wire for me EVER. I have seen what can happen with electronics and servos that get a bad signal for even a 1/10th of a second.

I'm fine with EFI, ABS, TCS, ESM, ELSD and other systems of that nature but ONLY if they can be hard disabled at will and on the fly (I'm talking a direct hardware disconnect like totally breaking the power circuit with a manual switch) that way if a system is interfering or god forbid hacked I can totally shut it down. (Like ABS while off road in heavy much and TCS in the same situation) I generally like these on a car IF they can totally deactivated if desired.

I am indifferent to blind spot monitoring and cameras but ONLY if they have absolutely zero way to store or transmit data in any fashion. I greatly like things like auto climate control and phone integration but again only if they can be turned off/have no way to record or store data. I hate GPS for this reason because unlike my phone that I can destroy or toss out the window to disallow monitoring it is kinda hard to rip a factory GPS system out. Besides, the phone works just as well (For non-commercial use) and is already being paid for.

My "Ideal" setup would be a 1969 572ci NA Hemi Charger with modern standalone EFI, TCS, ABS, rack and pinion steering plus full disks, modern 4 link rear and double A arm front, modern infotainment head unit, Front and rear cameras liked to the head-unit, blind-spot monitoring, normal vacuum controlled CC with a electronically regulating speed unit, GM style HUD, and finally a mechanical LSD. In black with chrome accents.

 

[Electrojake]

...But at what point do you think the government will have gone too far?

I am sure I will get responses ranging from "TPMS was already too far" to "I wouldn't mind a self driving vehicle." I think there is a good compromise between technology and simplicity, but it is getting to the point of being ridiculous.

I did not mean to make this too political, only to voice my thoughts.

Your kidding, right?
The government has “gone too far” a long time ago.
Or maybe it's not "the government" at all.

I used to get angry at the government. I used to curse the president, but not anymore. That stopped on November 6, 2012.
Silly me, the president is one man, and he only gets one 4 or 8 year gig.
I then began to realize that; “one guy cant possibly do this much damage to the fabric of an entire nation”.

Research showed me that only 0.8% of all Americans serve in the military, (disgraceful if you ask me).
And that even during the revolution Washington only had about 3% of Americans backing him. Thankfully a lot of his backing came from Europe, (who hated England at the time too).

So next time you think about what it took to build this amazing land of freedom and opportunity, and how now most Americans look at the USA as the problem with the world and not the gift that she truly is, dont get angry at the guy in the Whitehouse... look in the mirror.

As it’s been since the founding…
A lot of repugnant know-it-all’s riding on the backs of an incredibly small core of patriots that will do what ever it takes to maintain this great nation in its intended state of liberty & freedom.

Semi related thought…
As we decay into the progressive abyss I’m sure the brave men that hold ‘The Thin Blue Line’ for us domestically are certainly feeling the stress of a society who’s moral fabric is starting to tear to the breaking point.

So yeah, very good thread starter; ”How Far is Too Far”
-Ej-

 

[GTyankee]

Back when i worked for the State of California Dept. of Transportation in San Diego, i was asked if i wanted to work for awhile with the NHTSA, California Highway Patrol & some other private industry companies
For a month they were doing Brake Testing on cars & every size truck, except 18 wheelers of several brands, including Mercedes Benz.
I was only told that they were testing a new type of Braking System, it turned out that they were working on what we now call the ABS brake system.
It was fun sliding around parking lots, wet & dry at different speeds, when they had all of us at the San Diego Stadium Parking lot, we were driving at speeds up to 55 mph & slamming on the brakes to see if we slid or not.

Then in 1997 i was asked to work for the NHTSA, California Highway Patrol & several foreign & domestic car companies, they were testing a new driverless car technology.
At that time it was called PATH, it was run by something called NAHSC, National Automated Highway Systems Consortium
My job was to be an obstacle that automated car came up on & either braked or passed, that was one boring job except for one day when the lead car was approaching me & the driver of one of the cars didn't trust the system to work & he grabbed the steering wheel & hit the brakes hard, the other cars worked well avoiding that car.

They never filmed the 10 wheel truck that i was driving, but this is a short film from back then.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dtj9J1A-PMk

I was asked back a couple years after '97 when they were testing here again

 

[guy65]

Thanks for the topic. I love it.
my believe is- there are always two sides of the story.
I love the technical aspect. Vehicles "talking" with each other, warning the drivers and can prevent accidents. Vehicle can drive by them self, quality of driving CAN be better. Slowpoes on the left lane will be history and traffic will move more smoothly, jams can be almost eliminated. We might not see people in their vehicles sitting around the coffee table in morning rush hour having their breakfast, while the vehicle drives you safe to work, but we will have people sitting relaxed in traffic while the vehicle does most of the duty.
there is also the other side- I think the human sense is not toppable. there are situations, where human intuition is challenged and sometimes reactions might be irrational for the synthetic brain, but necessary. I also believe, if you take more and more away, people adapt and just getting negligent. lazy. don't pay attention. starting to depend on those systems. Driving will not be a pleasure no more, but necessity. the way of thinking, all of the way society works will change.
and there we are at the other, the dark side- all these "helpers" depending on a central intelligence which will be able to track every step you do, every move you make. you are controllable. And there I see the danger. I hate being controlled. I hate being told what to do or not to do. Hey- I'm within legal boundaries- so what is it your concern, what I'm doing? In the moment I am complete controllable, I'm also vulnerable for manipulation. We have to see, that all these things are not only happening in the cars- right now we are already at the point, where your refrigerator orders your stuff and is able to use your credit card to pay for the stuff when it gets delivered to your house- not long, and the robot delivery truck docks to the back of your house at the access door to your fridge and loads it up. your smartphone sends per gps all the time where you are, what you do, and people don't even understand, what they actually do, when they check in everywhere they go. facebook gives you commercial suggestion for products you googled,, food you eat, cars you look at, etc...- we are on the way to 1984. The way liberals want to make you believe, what they believe is a small taste of what will come.
I love the tech. but I hate what's behind it. I want to be in control what I'm doing and not be dictated by a machine programmed by people who could take over your life, when ever they want to. Is anybody even aware, if somebody wants to, he can wipe out your entire life, makes you non-existent with one press on a button? This is where we are already and the next step to total control is the self driving, self thinking vehicle.
Just imagine- the worst nightmare of dictators in this world- and the worst nightmare of people welcoming the new world order- are things and people you can't control.
They already talking about chip implants for identification. Yeah- easy- you come close to your stuff and it's unlocked. but the same way you're open for all kind of tracking- you're under control and if you not comply, they don't even have to search for you- they know where you are at any time.
Nope- it's going too far. I'm scared. I don't want it and I know, that I will fight against it as long as I can. My good partner is biology which puts me into the lucky situation of end- of - life- span. I'm so old- in 30 years somebody can pound a couple hundred # of dirt on top of me and I'm done. I just feel sorry for all the young ones, fighting for their millennial-thing and don't even understand, what it means to be free- they are already born in slavery. they already slaves of their smart phones controlled by big companies. some will wake up one day and feel the nightmare they live in- but then it will be too late. My believe is, 2084 will be the real 1984. and we're not too far away no more. We will come to the point, where war games, terminator, tomorrowland, future world, etc. will not be fiction anymore. if you are a confirm individual, lazy and just want to swim down the stream because it's easy, yeah- that's for you, guys. for me- a no go. I get the feeling to be tied down, I will break out and do all it takes to free my self. been there, done it and I will defend my freedom and everyone else who wants it, if necessary with my life. I'd rather die as a free man, than live on my knees in chains. Regardless what kind of chains.


sorry for the social-crap, but that's how I see it.
I oppose self driving vehicles. this is one reason, the other is- I have too much fun with driving by my self. Nevertheless- I like systems supporting the safety of driving, like ABS, ESC, Electronic sway control in trailers, cruise control ( a feature I really love), free speech device for cell phone use while driving (use it very often) and stuff like that- but don't step on the breaks, when I don't tell you to!
as a conclusion- well- I like stuff, and I want to have the choice. I want to be able to pick by my self, what I want and how far I want to go.
I don't want to live like Amish. I don't want to live like the mountain men. I don't want to live like tomorrowland. I want to have the free choice of a spot, somewhere in between. And making such systems mandatory, making TV's only as smart TV's that you don't have a choice no more, making only smart phones, smart fridges, smart watches, smart computers, smart house doors, smart cars, and all electronically connected, that when I leave work, the computer knows exactly the time with estimated traffic, when I come home and I open the door and the food is ready cooked- nope. not my idea of life-quality.

 

[Thunderhorse]

It is quite simple, really.

America is the Economic engine, for the rest of the world.

In order to raise the Worlds Economy, and thus the overall standard of Living, for Everyone, America must invent/develop/mass produce each and every next great thing.

Since no company goes out of it's way to add to costs, all of this must be legislated. Once legislated, it is forced upon Manufacturers, eventually trickling down to end consumer. Since it s a legislated, Must-have, For-all & Every kind of thing, costs eventually come down to the point that the rest of the world can afford to join in too.

Only flaw in all of this, which has been going on since the American Industrial Revolution, is that the American consumer no longer has the disposable income they once did, nor the savings, and all the jobs that provided for those incomes , are now overseas.

Then again, maybe I'm just feeling Grumpy today . . . .

I disagree that technology must be mandated by the government, I would say that tye private sector is far and away better at developing and advancing technology than the government sector, and they do so best when unfettered by mandates. That's one reason why the growth of industrializing nations tapers off eventually once their institutional development catches up.

Companies are more than willing to add costs if they anticipate an even bigger payoff. Sometimes it doesn't pan out, but it often does.

Your kidding, right?
The government has “gone too far” a long time ago.
Or maybe it's not "the government" at all.

I used to get angry at the government. I used to curse the president, but not anymore. That stopped on November 6, 2012.
Silly me, the president is one man, and he only gets one 4 or 8 year gig.
I then began to realize that; “one guy cant possibly do this much damage to the fabric of an entire nation”.

Research showed me that only 0.8% of all Americans serve in the military, (disgraceful if you ask me).
And that even during the revolution Washington only had about 3% of Americans backing him. Thankfully a lot of his backing came from Europe, (who hated England at the time too).

So next time you think about what it took to build this amazing land of freedom and opportunity, and how now most Americans look at the USA as the problem with the world and not the gift that she truly is, dont get angry at the guy in the Whitehouse... look in the mirror.

As it’s been since the founding…
A lot of repugnant know-it-all’s riding on the backs of an incredibly small core of patriots that will do what ever it takes to maintain this great nation in its intended state of liberty & freedom.

Semi related thought…
As we decay into the progressive abyss I’m sure the brave men that hold ‘The Thin Blue Line’ for us domestically are certainly feeling the stress of a society who’s moral fabric is starting to tear to the breaking point.

So yeah, very good thread starter; ”How Far is Too Far”
-Ej-

I think that it starts with whoever is in power because they set the tone, but would agree it is driven by the bureaucratic organizations. I agree there are lots of idiots and freeloaders, but I have recently started to question if this sort of thing is what most people want. After all, we were all told that it was pretty much a done deal that Hilrod was going to be elected, but look what happened with that. Seems almost like Dewey vs. Truman.

 

[Electrojake]

Good reply's, all of them.
I appreciate this crew immensely.

We are collectively called 'America' and the last 240 years have been a gas! :smiley_thumbs_up:

 

[gofishn]

I disagree that technology must be mandated by the government, I would say that tye private sector is far and away better at developing and advancing technology than the government sector, and they do so best when unfettered by mandates. That's one reason why the growth of industrializing nations tapers off eventually once their institutional development catches up.

Companies are more than willing to add costs if they anticipate an even bigger payoff. Sometimes it doesn't pan out, but it often does.

On that, we can agree.

What I meant was that the totality of the mandated improvements, vs the natural progression of advancement, due to market forces, is where the American Govt is forcing us, Americans, to both invent, develop and utilize the newest technologies.

Regretfully, I type far too slowly & poorly to further explain that which calls for an in depth clarification and discussion.

 

[sandawilliams]

I get it, people don't want to get in wrecks and look for ways around them. That's why we have stuff in new vehicles like the radar sensors that enable adaptive cruise control and automatic braking, and lane departure and blind spot monitoring. It seems to me that this year in particular, there has been more technology researched, released, and tested than ever before; all trending towards self driving cars (picture the Johnny-cab from Total Recall).

http://blog.caranddriver.com/feds-w...n-new-cars-starting-in-2021/?src=socialflowFB

But at what point do you think the government will have gone too far? I am sure I will get responses ranging from "TPMS was already too far" to "I wouldn't mind a self driving vehicle." I think there is a good compromise between technology and simplicity, but it is getting to the point of being ridiculous.

Here is my take: I do not oppose this technology wholesale, however I do oppose it being government mandated. I believe these technologies are crutches for idiots who are too distracted by their phones to pay attention to driving, or drunks who do indeed cause a lot of accidents. Neither of these cases warrants a federal mandate IMHO because they are both preventable, these technologies just encourage irresponsibility and assist people in getting away with it.

Additionally, what will be the base price of vehicles in the future? I remember as a kid you could get the cheapest cars for under $10,000 and a decently equipped compact under $20k. In this context, it seems that within the past decade or so $30,000 has become the new $20,000 as a target point for budgeting for a vehicle; even accounting for inflation the price of vehicles has skyrocketed. This is largely due to the increased amount of technology, and while I am not opposed to its availability for those willing and able to pay for it, I am opposed to making people pay for it on even the most basic of models. Even in nominal terms, how many of you ever thought that there would be pickups costing $70,000, especially some of you older guys-and some of you may have bought such trucks. I remember when dad bought his Ram for $27-$28,000, it was the most he'd ever paid for a vehicle in his life and he had some second thoughts (this was a well equipped SLT in 2009). Fast forward to the present and the least I've paid for a vehicle was $27,500-and it was a used base model Durango which, ironically does not have blind spot warning or any of this yet-to be mandated technology; though by standards of a decade ago it would rival top trim vehicles in options. I would love to get a Challenger as a 3rd vehicle someday, but have decided that I will probably just get a Ramcharger because with the way prices are trending I will never be able to afford a Challenger as prices rise.

It seems to me that this will eventually result in the federal mandate of self driving cars, at which point 1) vehicles will become no more than an appliance and 2) private vehicle ownership will come to an end. Why own a car if you are just using it to travel to a pre-programmed destination? Why create unnecessary emissions by taking your own car when there are as many people going to your destination as there are seats in the car?

All-electric vehicles will not replace ICEs for the for the foreseeable future because the only way to generate the amount of electricity required to power everyone's vehicular transportation requirements is through nuclear power. However the same proponents of all electric vehicles are the same ones promoting solar, wind, and other low-yield means of energy production; and they are generally opposed to nuclear energy despite the fact that it is actually very clean. Until these people can reconcile their philosophical dichotomy, private ownership of all electric vehicles will be impossible on the scale it is today. I think this will lead the government to outlaw or tax beyond the means of the majority, vehicles powered by "unclean" fuels, also leading to self driving, public transportation cars for most of us. Exceptions may be made for commercial trucks that need to haul long distances until battery technology enables them to drive as far as necessary with such heavy loads and without a recharge.

I did not mean to make this too political, only to voice my thoughts.

Much of this is the liberals continue to try to make the world idiot proof. It cant be done but they try.

 

[guy65]

On that, we can agree.

What I meant was that the totality of the mandated improvements, vs the natural progression of advancement, due to market forces, is where the American Govt is forcing us, Americans, to both invent, develop and utilize the newest technologies.

Regretfully, I type far too slowly & poorly to further explain that which calls for an in depth clarification and discussion.

100% agree.
@ Sandawilliams- they do it and there ain't a dern thing, you can do about it. Try to buy a cell phone without internet and GPS tracking. Try to buy a TV without Smart function. Try to buy speaker system without Bluetooth. The more people buy the stuff, the cheaper it gets and at the end it's more expensive in the production process, to leave it out. believe it or not- a fully equipped vehicle is cheaper to produce than one, where nothing is in- even that cheaper, that they just include stuff instead of leaving it out. And on the other hand- vehicles without stuff don't sell. period. Not many people buy a blank vehicle with basic radio, stickshift, no electrical windows, manual seat, no steering wheel adjustment and just plain plastic interior. Standard 30 years ago, today they would have to pay somebody to take it. Means- in 10 years, things, you can't find even in luxury vehicles will be standard in basic edition. even though they don't make you, you will have no choice. or can you tell me one new vehicle without can-bus on the market?

 

[striker2237]

100% agree.
@ Sandawilliams- they do it and there ain't a dern thing, you can do about it. Try to buy a cell phone without internet and GPS tracking. Try to buy a TV without Smart function. Try to buy speaker system without Bluetooth. The more people buy the stuff, the cheaper it gets and at the end it's more expensive in the production process, to leave it out. believe it or not- a fully equipped vehicle is cheaper to produce than one, where nothing is in- even that cheaper, that they just include stuff instead of leaving it out. And on the other hand- vehicles without stuff don't sell. period. Not many people buy a blank vehicle with basic radio, stickshift, no electrical windows, manual seat, no steering wheel adjustment and just plain plastic interior. Standard 30 years ago, today they would have to pay somebody to take it. Means- in 10 years, things, you can't find even in luxury vehicles will be standard in basic edition. even though they don't make you, you will have no choice. or can you tell me one new vehicle without can-bus on the market?

I wish there was something without can bus........too bad it's a standard now.

 

[namretsud]

I too believe that governments and Major corporations are going too far with self driving cars and Artificial Intelligence. Those things are only as good as the programmers make them until the AI decides it knows better than mankind and decides mankind is a disaster that needs to be eliminated. Scary times ahead if the far ahead thinkers don't slow things down.

 

[Thunderhorse]

On that, we can agree.

What I meant was that the totality of the mandated improvements, vs the natural progression of advancement, due to market forces, is where the American Govt is forcing us, Americans, to both invent, develop and utilize the newest technologies.

Regretfully, I type far too slowly & poorly to further explain that which calls for an in depth clarification and discussion.

Ah, now I get what you're saying. I agree that the government is manipulating the direction of advancement.

 

[Model-A-Driver]

Right now and this has been true for the past few years, if you have a serious accident your own beloved Ram or any other make can and will be your worse prosecutor. Especially if you are towing over your capacity. It is down right scary.

 

[striker2237]

Right now and this has been true for the past few years, if you have a serious accident your own beloved Ram or any other make can and will be your worse prosecutor. Especially if you are towing over your capacity. It is down right scary.

Again, standalone systems are best systems......

 

[gofishn]

I too believe that governments and Major corporations are going too far with self driving cars and Artificial Intelligence. Those things are only as good as the programmers make them until the AI decides it knows better than mankind and decides mankind is a disaster that needs to be eliminated. Scary times ahead if the far ahead thinkers don't slow things down.

Actually, that is not their greatest danger.

Right now, every driver, with an actual license, knows how to actually drive.
They have passed a test, actually driven, now have experience, in all kinds of situations and conditions. Once the driver less technology truly become common place, most will forget how to drive. Not unlike mathematics today.

Just last week, in a meeting with some fellows. All of whom were few years younger than I. We, had to compute 481 x 5, then the sum (times) 52. Followed by 192 X 10, the sum Times 1.3, divided by 130.

Should have seen all the cell phones come out. By the time they had it started entering the numbers, I was done, and they freaked .

 

[spamPALA]

I'm not worried, I can fix cars. Old ones, new ones, in between.

What kind of grown-ass man is afraid of the future?

 

[Guy Montag]

Great thread! Everyone on here enjoys their vehicles on some level...once vehicles are autonomous it will be as interesting as your dishwasher. I'm afraid of the law of unintended consequences. What will become of everyone working in the trucking, bus, taxi businesses? An article I read predicted a 60% percent reduction in the auto insurance business. The auto body repair business would have a substantial reduction in work force. Should I include the army of tort lawyers making coin on every fender bender? To be serious...isn't the auto industry (everything good & bad) a cornerstone of the economy?
THEN AGAIN.....Monday (12Dec16 0600 hrs) location interstate highway, raining with heavy rush hour traffic, I was in Lane number 3 (slow lane) pinhead passed me on the right shoulder, rides alone the end of an entrance ramp to pass an eighteen wheel, continues on the right shoulder, before reentering lane 3. Maybe it is time for the self driving car. I love how people attempt to kill themselves, just to get to work.