| ▲ | throwaway85825 5 hours ago |
| The irony is cars got screens largely due to the backup camera mandate which was intended to be a safety feature. Governments are very bad at understanding unintended consequences. |
|
| ▲ | fineIllregister 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| - The mandate is for rear visibility. Car manufacturers choose to implement it with the back-up camera. Beyond that, it's obviously safer to be able to see everything behind the vehicle. - My vehicle has a backup camera with a screen, but has physical buttons for all controls (A/C, audio system). There's no reason cars can't have both. |
| |
| ▲ | rootusrootus 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The mandate is for rear visibility Specifically, 10 feet by 20 feet directly behind the vehicle. I'm actually curious how this could be achieved with only mirrors. That's a pretty big swath for anything with a viewpoint where the driver is sitting. > My vehicle has a backup camera with a screen Early implementations just used a screen in the rearview mirror. No need for any kind of infotainment screen. | | | |
| ▲ | throwaway85825 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | When it already has a screen it's much cheaper to get rid of the buttons then. The screen as a requirement is priced in whereas the buttons are not and thus cut. |
|
|
| ▲ | sparrc 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| A screen for the backup camera doesn't necessarily mean everything has to be through the screen at all. Most Toyotas I've seen have a screen for the backup camera and the carplay/music/gps console, but everything else is still knobs and buttons. This is true on both my 2013 and 2026 Toyotas. |
| |
| ▲ | Pfhortune 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Also true on my 2020 RAV4 and 2025 Tacoma. I tried a 2025 Ford Maverick for a year before I traded it for the Tacoma. All the AC/Heat/Etc controls were on the screen. Couldn't stand it. Put me off of ever considering a new Ford again. |
|
|
| ▲ | brokencode 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Are you suggesting that governments shouldn’t require safety features because car manufacturers might implement them badly? |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway85825 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The EPA push for fuel efficiency made it easier to hit targets by selling huge trucks instead of small cars. There is a value in safety regulation but the incentives as legislated have led to negative results. It needs to be fixed or repealed. Not sure there's a clean solution here. |
|
