From: Brent on
On 2008-12-04, Steve <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote:
> Brent wrote:
>
>> with computer controls it would be entirely software to shut down the
>> car now.
>
> And the first time someone gets killed because he didn't have the choice
> of sacrificing his engine to get to a safe spot....

I wasn't implying a hard cut off, 'now' meant in the present day.

From: Ray O on

"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
news:W1VZk.6769$W06.5308(a)flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Ray O wrote:
>> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:qkzZk.5873$pr6.3308(a)flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>> SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> A lot more engines are destroyed by a loss of coolant than "worn out"
>>>>> oil. My nephew destroyed a three year old BMW X5 by not knowing or not
>>>>> noticing the temperature gauge, after the water pump started leaking.
>>>> This is unfortunately a known issue on these cars. But in Driver's Ed,
>>>> didn't your nephew get taught to run his eyes across the gauges every
>>>> couple minutes and make sure everything was okay? You gotta watch
>>>> them.
>>> There is no more driver's ed in schools.
>>>
>>
>> Our local high school still offers driver's ed.
>
> Wow, where's that?

Outside of Chicago, IL

>
> When I think back to drivers ed in high school, where we'd go four to a
> car on the regular roads, with two students in the back seat, while
> another student drove, and the instructor was riding shotgun, I can just
> imagine the screams of horror by parents if this were to happen today.

I think that is still how driver's ed happens here.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)


From: E. Meyer on

On 12/4/08 12:32 PM, in article b98gj45933dq7unansu3dlmt3ng7ao9c8m(a)4ax.com,
"Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted(a)comcast.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:10:30 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ray O wrote:
>>> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:qkzZk.5873$pr6.3308(a)flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>>> SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> A lot more engines are destroyed by a loss of coolant than "worn out"
>>>>>> oil. My nephew destroyed a three year old BMW X5 by not knowing or not
>>>>>> noticing the temperature gauge, after the water pump started leaking.
>>>>> This is unfortunately a known issue on these cars. But in Driver's Ed,
>>>>> didn't your nephew get taught to run his eyes across the gauges every
>>>>> couple minutes and make sure everything was okay? You gotta watch them.
>>>> There is no more driver's ed in schools.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Our local high school still offers driver's ed.
>>
>> Wow, where's that?
>>
>> When I think back to drivers ed in high school, where we'd go four to a
>> car on the regular roads, with two students in the back seat, while
>> another student drove, and the instructor was riding shotgun, I can just
>> imagine the screams of horror by parents if this were to happen today.
>
> As far as I know driver's ed is still a HS graduation requirement in
> Illinois.

When did they start doing that? It certainly was not a graduation
requirement in Illinois when I went to high school there. It was offered in
most schools, but only as an extra cost after school activity.

> So when you say "There is no more driver's ed in schools" you may only
> be talking about California. Or maybe you just don't know.
> Remember, you have to look at the big picture.
>
> --Vic


From: Steve on
Frank ess wrote:
>
>
> Steve wrote:
>> Brent wrote:
>>
>>> with computer controls it would be entirely software to shut down
>>> the car now.
>>
>> And the first time someone gets killed because he didn't have the
>> choice of sacrificing his engine to get to a safe spot....
>>
>> The final decision should rest with the driver. But the driver
>> should KNOW what the implications of that decision are.
>
> You'd expect that to be true in every aspect of motoring, and "on
> average" it's true -- isn't it? Seems to be working out satisfactorily,
> or the society would change standards for participation as a driver --
> wouldn't it?

Society has been changing the standards for participation as a driver.
In the wrong direction.

My grandparents were born before the automobile, but had absolutely no
problem monitoring a cluster of analog gauges with no lights or audible
warnings in their early cars. Just read the newsgroups for a while
today, and you'll see countless questions from idiots to the effect of,
"My car won't run anymore and my oil light's been on for a while, do you
think it might be related...?" There are people so ignorant today that
they can't even tell you whether the car won't start because the starter
won't turn the engine, or whether the engine is cranking but won't fire.
They don't even seem to know the difference, its actually a real-world
manifestation of the "I turn the key and it goes" mentality we used to
make blonde jokes about, but didn't REALLY believe existed.

And the fact that basic driver's education is not offered in schools
anymore in many states (I'll vouch for Texas, we've already heard from
NJ and CA) is further evidence that "society" tolerates really lousy
drivers on the roads.
From: Steve on
Brent wrote:
> On 2008-12-04, Steve <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote:
>> Brent wrote:
>>
>>> with computer controls it would be entirely software to shut down the
>>> car now.
>> And the first time someone gets killed because he didn't have the choice
>> of sacrificing his engine to get to a safe spot....
>
> I wasn't implying a hard cut off, 'now' meant in the present day.
>

Yes... but does it make a difference? If the computer shuts the car off
'now' or 'in 30 seconds,' its still out of the driver's control. I know
you mentioned an override switch, but I can still see the lawsuits
flying. "I got all scared when the warning went off, I couldn't find the
switch, so I looked around for it and hit a guardrail while I was
looking down, and then a truck hit me, my passenger was killed and I'm
paralyzed. The carmaker owes me 300 million dollars."