It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Self-parking Volvo ploughs into journalists...

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

+1 more 
posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:41 AM
This is the full headline, sine the title doesn't have enough room!

Self-parking Volvo ploughs into journalists after owner neglects to pay for extra feature that stops cars crashing into people

I'm not quite sure which part irks me more... That it parked into the journalists but didn't cause any real damage to them (damn paparazzi!), or that you have to specifically buy the module so you don't run into humans!

Why would something like that be considered a "extra" feature?

I can't think of a single reason why avoidance of other cars, buildings and obstacles is standard... But avoiding humans? Well, you pay more for that nifty little feature!

I guess it because we're soft and squishy... so we won't damage the paint.

Maybe they figured people would buy "Package B" Since it's cheaper than a car wash after every parking job?

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:49 AM
Wow...great marketing scheme!

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:50 AM
well if you have to run over someone, journalists are a great option.
They are just saying that "extra feature" nonsense as an excuse.
the car is obviously sentient and knew it could get away with attempted murder.

so now cars will have features you need to buy separately like DLC for videogames?

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 05:53 AM
a reply to: gspat

I just don't get today's big business.

You would think some high and mighty CEO would make sure bright and smart programmers are hired for important projects

And you would think they would take safety first into account.

I am not a programmer but I would program for safety first function later.

What's up programmers, are sensors expensive.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:19 AM
this should be made illegal for the manufactorer to not include this device,
this is not acceptable to me in any way shape or form..

do none of you have children,this should be fitted as standard period.

makes me really laugh when volvo's main claim is they are a safe car

wheres everyone's outrage, this is so wrong ..i cry more for my fellow humans eachday

edit on 27-5-2015 by stuthealien because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:23 AM
a reply to: gspat


I'm not laughing at the people getting hurt but what CEO moron would even consider NOT adding that feature as standard?

I'm sure the people who made that decision make way too much for what little they actually do.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:25 AM
Mighty big lawsuit incoming on Volo I imagine.

Amazing that's not standard.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:26 AM
I suppose the driver is still responsible and liable for the people he hurt?

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:27 AM
a reply to: gspat

Aaaa, my knees...

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:30 AM
In a way I kinda understand. I don't think the intention is to have no one in the car. So a driver is still required, and would have likely not decided to run into people. Poor demonstration though, of the technology, given it pretty much failed. lol

But that's the future I guess.. you buy a car and then you can pay for DLC. lol.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:45 AM
a reply to: sn0rch

how is this the future,,we should not accept this ,have you been programmed or brainwashed .
what the hell is going on when people just accept this??????????????????

this is not normal to accept this and just roll over,im simply amazed at how sheep like everyone is becoming everday.

i say we set fire to volvo dealerships untill they fit this as standard (well maybe not this far but please feel my anger)

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 06:57 AM
Volvo are most likely saying this is an extra feature now because they are fearing the massive amount of money they are going to be sued for. How avoiding humans can be deemed an "extra" feature is beyond me... Next thing you know the same type of car will crush someones pet and they will have the same excuse. I'm sure it wouldn't be that hard to include some type of thermal sensor for body heat. Bunch of morons.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 07:01 AM
If you can't or don't want to drive yourself, hop in a cab or bus.

We are becoming far to dependent on devices to overcome our lazy ways. Stick your self driving cars up your brain dead asses!

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 07:05 AM
a reply to: Irishhaf

Or a lawsuit on the dude that owns the car. I'm sure car companies don't won't to have to pay for drive by themselves cars that have a crash, maybe set a precedent in law and flip it to the owner.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 07:07 AM
a reply to: Coagula

Yes, Volvo are the morons. Not the mush brain people that don't want to be bothered with just driving themselves.

Our future is doomed. "I see lazy people"...

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 07:21 AM
It was moving pretty quick! (Use full screen to play properly)

edit on 27-5-2015 by smurfy because: Text.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 08:29 AM
a reply to: smurfy

Yeah Pink Shirt Dood
Gets a face full of hood.

Take your hands
outta your pockets
and get outta the way.


posted on May, 27 2015 @ 09:24 AM
I'm glad everyone is ok but I watched the dude get smashed like 15 times lol. I'm with everyone else here on how stupid is it to not have that feature as a standard.

posted on May, 27 2015 @ 09:34 AM
Questionable option for a questionable feature.... If you cant fecking park then you shouldn't be driving! Quite why this was ever invented in the first place baffles me!



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 09:57 AM
Those of you pegging this on the programmers have it wrong. They don't make the decisions into what is and is not included as standard in the car.

More than likely there were several meetings on if this should be included or not, and no doubt Volvo crunched the numbers on which would be cheaper; paying to settle for accidents like this (if they have to pay anything at all) or including the part as standard. If it came out including that package as standard on each car would be more than the settlements, then they would've gone with the former. It wouldn't have been the first time a company has made such a decision.

General Motors did it.

Ford did it too.

McDonalds had a famous case about it.

Samsung did it, though in this one no one was hurt/killed.

If we don't want companies making decisions such as these, we need to push to have the system changed to where it isn't more cost efficient for a business to cause such deaths through inaction.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in