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.