Oct 31, 2018

Some auto safety systems can be downright scary

Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/Axios

Cars do scary things sometimes when operating in driver-assist mode: braking in shadows, swerving at unseen obstacles and failing to respond the way we expect. The other night, an invisible set of hands kept vying for control of the 2019 Acura RDX I was driving. It gave me the creeps, like the car was possessed.

Why it matters: Consumers need to be able to trust the advanced driver assist systems on today’s vehicles or they will never embrace fully self-driving cars.

“These systems have a lot of potential for improving safety and reducing crashes. But we lose all of that if they are implemented in such a way that drivers are annoyed or uneasy about using them."
— Russ Rader, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

The big picture: Safety features like blind-spot detection or backup cameras are the early building blocks of automated driving. We're now seeing more advanced systems —lane-keeping assist, adaptive cruise control and automatic emergency braking — that aim to help drivers or even correct their actions if necessary.

But these technologies don't always behave the way humans would, and sometimes, as I've learned, that can be downright frightening.

  • Cadillac's Super Cruise, a truly impressive hands-off highway driving system, got confused and lurched to the left and back again when it couldn't find the lane markings as I began to drive across a bridge.
  • When I was driving Volkswagen's 2019 Jetta, it veered toward the center median when it detected what it thought was an obstacle. It was just a puddle of orange paint spilled by a road crew.
  • IIHS says a Tesla Model 3 often slowed down unexpectedly when it encountered tree shadows on the road, oncoming vehicles in another lane or crossing traffic far ahead.
  • IIHS tested adaptive cruise control and active lane-keeping assist systems in the Mercedes E-class, BMW 5-series, Volvo S90 and Tesla Models 3 and S. All demonstrated their own share of creepy behavior.

The risk: With names like Autopilot or Pilot Assist, many of these technologies erroneously leave consumers thinking their cars can drive themselves.

  • If companies make these systems too capable, consumers might zone out and not be ready to react when they need to.
  • But if cars brake or swerve erratically, drivers might switch off the technology altogether, missing out on their potential safety benefits.

The bottom line: The early results underscore the fact that today's systems aren't a good substitute for human drivers.

Go deeper:

Go deeper

Trump says he will campaign against Lisa Murkowski after her support for Mattis

Trump with Barr and Meadows outside St. John's Episcopal church in Washington, D.C. on June 1. Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

President Trump tweeted on Thursday that he would endorse "any candidate" with a pulse who runs against Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).

Driving the news: Murkowski said on Thursday that she supported former defense secretary James Mattis' condemnation of Trump over his response to protests in the wake of George Floyd's killing. She described Mattis' statement as "true, honest, necessary and overdue," Politico's Andrew Desiderio reports.

7 hours ago - World

The president vs. the Pentagon

Trump visits Mattis and the Pentagon in 2018. Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty

Over the course of just a few hours, President Trump was rebuffed by the Secretary of Defense over his call for troops in the streets and accused by James Mattis, his former Pentagon chief, of trampling the Constitution for political gain.

Why it matters: Current and former leaders of the U.S. military are drawing a line over Trump's demand for a militarized response to the protests and unrest that have swept the country over the killing of George Floyd by police.

New York Times says Tom Cotton op-ed did not meet standards

Photo: Avalon/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

A New York Times spokesperson said in a statement Thursday that the paper will be changing its editorial board processes after a Wednesday op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), which called for President Trump to "send in the troops" in order to quell violent protests, failed to meet its standards.

Why it matters: The shift comes after Times employees began a coordinated movement on social media on Wednesday and Thursday that argued that publishing the op-ed put black staff in danger. Cotton wrote that Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act in order to deploy the U.S. military against rioters that have overwhelmed police forces in cities across the country.