

The Toyota Witch Hunt - gyeh
http://www.businessweek.com/print/lifestyle/content/feb2010/bw20100225_403524.htm

======
old-gregg
"Every man, woman, and child in the U.S. has approximately a one-in-8000
chance of perishing in a car accident every year. Over a decade, that's about
one in 800. Given the millions of cars included in the Toyota recalls and the
fewer than 20 alleged deaths over the past decade, the alleged fatality rate
is about one death per 200,000 recalled Toyotas. Even if all the alleged
deaths really are resultant from vehicle defects—highly unlikely—and even if
all the worst things people are speculating about Toyotas are true, and you're
driving one, and you aren't smart or calm enough to shift to neutral if the
thing surges, you're still approximately 250 times likelier to die in one of
these cars for reasons having nothing to do with unintended acceleration. So
if you can muster the courage to get into a car and drive, the additional
alleged risk of driving a Toyota is virtually negligible..."

The rest is in the C&D article referenced, I believe, by the author:

[http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q1/toyota_recall_scan...](http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car/10q1/toyota_recall_scandal_media_circus_and_stupid_drivers-
editorial)

~~~
mturmon
The C&D article (and the ones it points to about their road test) is really
good. Because there are more people talking about this than actually know
anything. Including in this thread.

The C&D article does leave the door open to the possibility of the brakes not
stopping the car. If you pump the brakes, rather than firmly putting them down
once, you may lose vacuum, or overheat the brakes in a series of "slow down a
little" steps. The vacuum is apparently hard to replenish when the throttle is
open.

The advice about turning the car off works sometimes, but not always. Suppose
you're in a rental Lexus like the one the CA state trooper died in. Would you
know that to kill the engine, you have to depress the off button for 3 seconds
continuously? Three seconds is a long time with the throttle wide open.

It seems the key technical mistake on Toyota's part, as pointed out in the C&D
article, is to omit an interlock that kills the throttle when the brake is
depressed. This is apparently standard on many other cars.

Toyota's damage control on this has been disastrous.

------
timtadh
This is definitely a witch hunt. The same thing happened in my ford truck when
I misplaced the mat after cleaning it. I simply turned the car off put the
clutch in and coasted to a stop at the edge of the highway and fixed the mat.
From the reports this sounds like the exact situation for the Toyota cars.
From my perspective nothing is wrong with the cars and the whole thing is way
overblown.

~~~
jonknee
Many of the Toyota problems had nothing to do with the mats--they are drive by
wire and the computer was slammed on the gas without the pedal being
depressed. Depending on when this occurs it could be deadly even with an
expert driver.

~~~
cryptnoob
Please forward your proof of this to Toyota and the congressional committee to
which Toyota swore this was not the case.

It's tempting to blame drive by wire, since electronics is black magic to most
people. Keep in mind that most passenger jets in the sky are fly by wire,
these days.

For you to point blank claim this to be true, when it's been flatly denied
several times, seems a bit over the top, don't you think?

~~~
jonknee
Complaints of out of control acceleration increased several times over after
moving to DbW and some recent complaints have noted that no floor mats were in
the vehicle (which makes it hard to blame on floor mats):

[http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/29/business/la-fi-
toyot...](http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/29/business/la-fi-toyota-
throttle29-2009nov29)

Toyota is claiming it's not the DbW system, but they also thought they had
this issue fixed a long time ago. It's a hard thing to prove unless you see it
yourself (unlike a broken cable like we used to have before DbW).

Even Woz thinks is the DbW software:

[http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10445564-64.html?tag=mncol...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10445564-64.html?tag=mncol;txt)

~~~
Confusion
_Complaints of out of control acceleration increased several times over after
moving to DbW_

Complaints of out of control acceleration increased after 2000. I guess it's
the millennium bug. In other words: correlation is not causation. Moreover, no
numbers are presented to actually support this correlation. What about
1996-1999? 100 cases would be totally plausible.

 _Even Woz thinks is the DbW software_ With the rather important difference
that it doesn't actually cause any problems, because he can just brake and
make the acceleration stop.

------
zzzmarcus
Can someone explain to me why Congress gets involved in investigating things
like Toyota's manufacturing defects or the way college football teams are
ranked?

Does Congress have a legal mandate to investigate anything it deems to be
interesting/fishy/a potential target for legislation? Has Congress always
conducted these types of investigations or is it a modern phenomenon?

~~~
whyenot
cynic: Congress' mandate is to investigate anything that will get votes, or
campaign funds.

Wikipedia: _Investigative hearings share some of the characteristics of
legislative and oversight hearings. The difference lies in Congress’s stated
determination to investigate, usually when there is a suspicion of wrongdoing
on the part of public officials acting in their official capacity, or private
citizens whose activities suggest the need for a legislative remedy.
Congress’s authority to investigate is broad and it has exercised this
authority since the earliest days of the republic. Its most famous inquiries
are benchmarks in American history: Credit Mobilier, Teapot Dome, Army-
McCarthy, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. Investigative hearings often lead to
legislation to address the problems uncovered. Judicial activities in the same
area of Congress’s investigation may precede, run simultaneously with, or
follow such inquiries._

It's not a recent phenomenon at all. For example, the Crédit Mobilier hearings
were in 1872.

~~~
zzzmarcus
Thanks for the answer. The difference is that the scandals in the Wikipedia
article all directly involve government:

Credit Mobilier: "The distribution of Crédit Mobilier stocks by Congressman
Oakes Ames along with cash bribes to congressmen"

Teapot Dome: "control of U.S. Navy petroleum reserves at Teapot Dome in
Wyoming and at Elk Hills and Buena Vista in California, were transferred from
the U.S. Navy Department to the Department of the Interior"

And Army-McCarthy, Watergate and Iran-Contra are all obviously directly tied
to the government.

In those cases it makes sense for Congress to get involved. It's when Congress
start to investigate "private citizens whose activities suggest the needs for
legislative remedy" that I get concerned. That type of broad power apparently
gives them free-reign to investigate anything they don't like.

It seems to me that in the past (15 or 20+ years ago) Congress didn't get
involved in non-government related "scandals" like Toyota and college
football, I'd be interested if anyone has examples to the contrary.

~~~
whyenot
"Baseball Probe Begins Tomorrow" - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 29, 1951.

[http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DDAbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=d...](http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DDAbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=d00EAAAAIBAJ&pg=4854,4723325&dq=baseball+congress+investigative+hearing&hl=en)

There are lots of other examples if you search newspaper archives using Google
News. I encourage you to go look for yourself.

------
yaroslavvb
Sudden acceleration complaints by year/make
[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1242358...](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124235858)

For model year 2009, Volkswagen had 11.5 complaints per 100k vehicles, whereas
Toyota had 7.5 and BMW 5.8

------
jsz0
It's times like this I feel like someone needs to tell the American people to
grow up and stop acting like scared children. They're so easily manipulated by
simple fear tactics. Automobiles are incredibly dangerous simply due to the
drivers behind the wheel. Design flaws are the least of your worries. We can't
seem to muster the same type of concentrated rage against drunk drivers,
texting drivers, or any other impairments that make automobiles less safe. We
can't even make laws that make automobiles safer by design. Why aren't side
air bags a requirement? or roof air bags? More frequent safety inspections?
Bad tires or worn out windshield wipers are so much more dangerous than the
statistical improbability of a stuck throttle. It really makes me incredibly
angry how capable Americans are of ignoring big problems and focusing on the
tiny ones instead. We're doomed as a country if this mindset doesn't change
and I'm not sure we don't deserve it.

------
snom370
While I agree that the media and politicians are now feasting on Toyotas
failures, the fact is that Toyota really botched this. Had they taken the
reports seriously earlier none of this would have happened, and lives could
have been spared. Apparently they never thought this story could spiral out of
control.

People seem to forget that this only happened until after Toyota had repeated
recalls, each promising to fix the problem.

Is there a ghost in the machine? I don't know, Woz certainly seems to think
so. Replacing floor mats and then gas pedals seems awfully like what happened
with the Therac 25 radiation overdoses in the 80s.

(The Therac 25 manufacturer first added an extra hardware switch to the
radiation therapy machine and claimed it was "an order of magnitude safer".
When more people died, the quick emergency fix was to remove the "up" button
from the VT100 console.)

------
apsec112
See the Great Seattle Windshield Pitting Epidemic:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Windshield_Pitting_Epid...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Windshield_Pitting_Epidemic)

------
peterarmstrong
It may be a witch hunt, but I have a 2008 Prius that has had a number of
issues with brakes after potholes etc -- going for about one second without
having much effect.

It has happened to me once when I went over a pothole and my wife a number of
times (she drives more).

I'm in Canada and my local dealer can't reproduce the problem yet, but put
yourself in the position of a Toyota owner who is no longer confident in being
safe and who would get less than half the purchase price for a car with <
70,000 KM on it.

The Honda dealer doesn't want Toyotas as tradeins; they can't sell them.

Can you feel the anger?

I don't want to have to buy another car; I want to work on my startup. But I
don't want to worry about my family's safety or buying some used car.

Toyota should be forced to buy back their crap products at some reasonable
percentage, since these problems remind me of "heisenbugs" in code...

~~~
peterarmstrong
Or to put it more succinctly: just because there are stupid and/or dishonest
people complaining about bugs in a product does NOT mean there are no bugs in
said product or that all claims are baseless.

I would bet any sample of 3000 complaints about the Ford Pinto or any product
had at least some stupid and some dishonest ones.

------
stcredzero
_If Congress really wanted to get at the truth, they should have called
disinterested third-party engineers to study and get their opinion on this
case. Nobody believes Toyota, even if the final facts prove it's correct.
Everyone believes the witnesses, even when the engineering evidence often
disproves their testimony. It is impossible to come to a scientifically valid
conclusion under those two circumstances, which is why many individuals
involved in this issue have described the proceedings as "witch hunts."_

Actual American political debate hardly happens anymore. What we have now is
theater. The mentality of the LCD American voter is simply abysmal. You can
see it from the low or sloppy intellectual content of the "product" which is
presented to them by politicians, journalists, and other media workers.

~~~
philwelch
"the LCD American voter..."

Heh, that works on two levels--not just "lowest common denominator" but also
the American voter who watches too much TV news on their LCD HDTV.

------
barmstrong
I had the exact same reaction when I saw this.."congress? why is congress
getting involved in this?"

If people are upset with how their Toyota cars are operating, then no one
stands to lose more than the Toyota company itself in lost revenue. So what
additional incentive or pressure could congress apply here except increased
publicity? Let's see...we lose a billion dollars, or get chewed out by some
old guys for a few hours, which sounds worse?

It seems really silly to watch politicians chastise a CEO and talk down to
him. Good engineering (especially on a massive scale like that) is really
hard. If they think they can do better then no one is stopping them (members
of congress) from starting their own car company to try and compete.
Otherwise, I'm not sure why they feel qualified to criticize.

Something else that bugged me is the quote from one of the witnesses which
said 'Shame on you Toyota for being so greedy'. So...you're saying they
intentionally pissed off all their customers as some sort of plan to make more
money? I'm so confused by this mentality people have that greed in
corporations is a bad thing. Yes, you could argue they sacrificed long term
quality for a short term savings, but this is hardly greedy, it's just bad
business practice that leaves you with LESS money.

This may be unrealistic, but I really wanted to see the Toyota CEO reply to
congress with some sort of statement like, "We won't be appearing at any
hearings. We are a private company and don't answer to government. We only
answer to our customers. So if any of our customers have questions here is a
toll free hotline. Members of congress, if you are a Toyota customer, feel
free to call as well, but you're role in government won't be taken into
account in how we respond."

------
johngalt
Perfect time to buy a Toyota, also I'd evaluate Toyota stock.

~~~
skushch
It would be very difficult to evaluate Toyota stock. This kind of media events
can warp public opinion about a company for a long time. I think it would be
very hard to put number to this. I would bet that even if tomorrow the
government comes out and says "oops, my bad, everything is fine" you wouldn't
see a sudden reversal.

------
psranga
Any comments on this article? This auto professor is able to reproduce the
problem.

[http://www.leftlanenews.com/report-toyota-electronics-
design...](http://www.leftlanenews.com/report-toyota-electronics-design-flaw-
causes-sudden-acceleration-video.html)

This is what the article says about the prof:

    
    
      Instead, we were treated to Dr. David Gilbert of Southern Illinois University, also a guest of Mr. Kane's, who claimed to have found how Toyota's electronic system could totally malfunction, creating a runaway car—and claimed he'd found the error in less than four hours. Spoiler alert: Dr. Gilbert was assigned this work by Kane's safety advocacy firm, with at least partial funding by trial lawyers.
    
      Here, too, is a problem: Dr. Gilbert said he relayed the results of that test and his concerns directly to Toyota. In short order Toyota looked into Dr. Gilbert's claims and found them not to be valid in terms of creating unintended acceleration. Then, to the company's surprise, it watched his appearance with Brian Ross on ABC News this past Monday night, Feb. 22.
    
      According to Toyota, it now appears that Dr. Gilbert had done something completely different in order to get a Toyota Avalon to accelerate under its own power. Toyota offered to evaluate Dr. Gilbert's Avalon, with ABC in attendance, and see what he did electronically to cause it to accelerate.
    
      Additionally, Toyota is fairly adamant that Gilbert's "test evaluation" on ABC News was not the original "discovery" he relayed to them on Feb. 16.

~~~
illumin8
The professor apparently hooked up an "external bypass device" to a brand new
Toyota Avalon, and then complains that the computer should sense the
artificial short he introduced into the system and disable the acceleration
system. Hardly the most reliable test.

------
mistermann
I believe two things related to this:

1\. to a certain degree, the US is punishing Japan due to their recent actions
in the bond markets. This is a very important problem for a very small amount
of people, but it makes great headlines. Do you think the US government is
genuinely interested in resolving this properly from an engineering
perspective?

2\. that 100% "drive by wire" systems should not be allowed...there should be
a big red "holy shit" kill switch on the dash of modern cars that kills power
to everything except steering and brakes

So, imho, its a very serious problem, that affects very few people (in the big
scheme of things), and there is a very simple solution, for going forward
technology at least, if not existing models. But do you guys get the feeling
that this is what the conversation is actually about? Something seems a bit
odd to me.

But then I'm one of those conspiracy theorists that think when you're running
15% budget deficits and have real (as measured using historical methods)
unemployment of 20%, and many bond issues are taken down 50% by the federal
reserve (literally printing money to buy your own debt), that you will start
to observe unusual things happening in the marketplace. The adherents of
Occam's Razor would imply that that I am simply crazy, becasue the simplest
answer is __always __the correct answer. So I guess thats it.

------
stcredzero
The Mythbusters tried to slam a car into reverse at speed. What they
discovered, is that there are safety mechanisms to prevent this from happening
in automatics.

<http://mythbustersresults.com/episode84>

~~~
kelnos
Not just automatics... my manual (2004 Honda) has an interlock that blocks the
shifter from moving into reverse if I'm moving forward at > 10mph.

------
sliverstorm
Thank god! I have heard only from people who buy into the witch hunt (and an
excellent name for it, that is). I am really very glad to see I'm not the only
person who realizes most of it is ridiculous and overblown. Hell, even if the
gas pedal corroded AND the floor mat held it down, has not one of these
drivers even though to reach down and PULL the goddamn thing up?

I pray people realize this is folly... I don't know what we're gonna do if
stupidity brings down the pillar of the auto industry, through no fault of
it's own.

~~~
mediaman
I don't disagree that this has been overblown, but in fairness it would be
fairly difficult to reach down and pull the gas pedal up while the engine is
raging and the vehicle is undergoing significant forward acceleration, while
the driver is presumably trying to avoid colliding into other vehicles and
objects.

Of course, they should just shift it to neutral and let it redline.

~~~
sliverstorm
Yes to the second part

as for the first part, doesn't have to be your hand. Depending on the vehicle,
you might be able to get your toe under the pedal.

------
Splines
This whole Toyota debacle makes me wonder if competing car companies buy cars
made by other manufacturers and poke at them in the hopes of having something
just like this happen.

~~~
mahmud
The risk of being caught doing that is grounds for bankruptcy and life
sentences.

------
jellicle
"As noted before, brakes always win out over engines, even at full throttle;
that has been tested and proved many times in the past 20 years, including
recent Car and Driver tests on Toyotas."

This is not necessarily true. It's entirely dependent on the brakes involved
and the engine involved; any given vehicle could go either way. I personally
have witnessed steel brake rotors melted and dripping off the vehicle; the
brakes had locked up at highway speed and the driver had continued driving,
reporting afterwards that the vehicle seemed a little sluggish but not
excessively so, so he hadn't stopped. For that vehicle: the brakes lost. For
other vehicles, perhaps ones with dinky engines and big fat brakes: the brakes
may win. It's certainly not the sort of thing where one can say "brakes always
win".

Car and Driver's article (
[http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/how_to_deal_with_u...](http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/how_to_deal_with_unintended_acceleration-
tech_dept) ) seems to assume that Toyotas don't cut the engine power when the
brakes are applied, but their own tests belie that. I would guess that
Toyota's software cuts the power LESS than the competition's software does.
But if you're stopping from 70mph with and without the throttle at full, and
you notice a minimal difference - as C&D did - I can guarantee you that the
throttle is being reduced when the brakes are applied. Maybe not to zero, but
reduced.

~~~
phaedrus
Absolutely. I used to own a V-8 Ford pickup; if you happened to hit the brakes
and the gas at the same time the power of the engine would completely
overwhelm the brakes and the truck would (start to or continue to) move. If
you accidently left the parking brake on, you couldn't discern a difference
while driving it. Coming from a state where many people own pickup trucks, I
was taught that the engine will overpower the brakes, every time. Now I own a
small car with exceptional brakes that I'm sure would stop in that situation,
but that's just the exception that proves the rule - it depends on how big
your engine is.

------
waivej
I bet there is a mechanical/electrical issue that is blown way out of
proportion, and human error in some of these issues.

Once I accidentally slammed on the gas thinking it was the brake. (I got
confused switching from a manual transmission to an automatic.) It was
scary...the car jumped a curb and my driver's ed teacher was furious. He
slammed his brake and it stopped the car.

~~~
vaksel
that's how I failed my first driver's test.

Was reversing into a spot, and hit gas instead of brakes.

------
mcburton
finally got around to creating a HN account. IMHO "unintended acceleration" is
the penis panic of the west.

------
sliverstorm
By the way, just in case it ever helps anyone:

If you are in a car moving along and you have to kill the engine, or the
engine dies, get on the brakes as fast as you can and don't let go. You can
ease up on the brakes almost to the point of letting go of the pedal, but
don't come off all the way.

The reason is the brakes will maintain the power-assist vacuum from the
engine, even when the engine is later switched off, until they are released
completely. The 'power-assist' strength will remain for tens of seconds, at
least. I've tried this many times before. I can't guarantee it works on modern
cars, but it sure did work on my '86 Toyota with standard hydraulic vacuum-
assist brakes.

~~~
phaedrus
I can't see why that would be necessary.

The vacuum _assist_ is just that - an assist. The brakes still work if you
don't have it, you just have to put some extra force on the pedal. It isn't
even that much force; I've driven older vehicles that don't have any assist at
all and it's not _that_ much harder to push the pedal.

------
erlanger
I hold the conspiracy theory that these issues are being so aggressively
sought out in an attempt to bring Toyota's image down to the level of American
auto manufacturers.

~~~
presidentender
I wholeheartedly agree. The sheer number of failures that have to occur, the
low level of action on the drivers' parts required to overcome the problem
(put it in neutral! Use your brakes! Use your _parking_ brakes!), the speed
and intensity of the government's response, and the fact that GM is so
unpopular combine to make the entire debacle suspect.

~~~
paulbaumgart
I haven't driven any newer Toyotas, but do they not let you turn off the
ignition while in motion/gear?

~~~
illumin8
The newer Toyotas all have push button start. Apparently, it's not very
intuitive, unless you have a lot of experience building PCs with ATX power
supplies, that you need to hold down the start button for 3-4 seconds to turn
off the engine when it is in drive.

It's almost like Microsoft designed these cars: "What? I push Start to shut
down the car/computer?"

~~~
Zak
I really don't understand the push button start fad. Unless it's coupled to an
RFID key or some such, it's _less_ convenient than just turning the key.

~~~
illumin8
It is coupled with RFID chips in your key. I actually find it very convenient
on my Hyundai. I can walk up to the car door and open it, it unlocks
automatically because the RFID key is in my pocket. I can sit down and start
the car and take off without ever removing my keys from my pocket.

It's also very convenient for opening the trunk without a key as well. It has
proximity sensors by the driver and passenger doors, as well as the trunk.

------
GrandMasterBirt
Wow. A wonderful article.

The real question is, just how in-control is the computer. And how much has to
go wrong such that uncontrollable acceleration happens and nothing can
override that acceleration such that no matter what you do the computer makes
the car go into "drive" and accelerate to the max, without responding to other
parts of the system like the breaks and such.

~~~
sliverstorm
The accelerator pedal would have to be immovable, frozen in place.

The ignition switch would have to lock or otherwise malfunction

The shift lever or clutch or automatic shift lever would have to malfunction

The brakes would have to overheat (does not really happen much in a production
car). It is not 100% true that brakes will always overpower the engine, but
the cases in which they don't are the ones with massive 700hp engines with big
'ol turbos and stock drum brakes, and in that situation it's the owner's
responsibility.

There would also have to be no runaway truck exits.

If you were creative and knew something about cars, you could pull one of many
fuses from the fuse box. On cars I've serviced, the computer fuse is always in
the driver kick panel, so just rip off that panel and start yanking fuses
while watching the road.

It should be noted that the e-brake on fwd cars is not your _best choice_
(though still a decent choice); while a locked up wheel provides drag, it does
not apply as much drag as a rolling wheel with maximum braking (which can
easily be obtained cause of ABS). Also at extreme speeds you run the risk of a
spin, which puts you possibly at risk for a roll.

~~~
jonknee
> The accelerator pedal would have to be immovable, frozen in place.

In recent Toyota vehicles the pedal isn't connected to the throttle--it's
drive by wire. In theory the computer could continue accelerating regardless
of the gas pedal's position.

~~~
cryptnoob
I've designed systems like this. You use redundant potentiometers to sense
throttle position. If they don't match within 5%, you power down.

You also toggle bits in your code. One in the main loop, another in any
interrupt service routine that you are dependent upon. These bits then go to a
GPIO so that the GPIO toggles. If the ISR freezes or the main loop freezes,
the GPIO quits toggling. You then have an hardware, RC-Diode type circuit,
that stays high if it's input toggles, but goes low, if it's input goes low
and stays low, or goes high and stays high. The output of this circuit drives
a relay, so that if the CPU quits toggling the GPIO, the relay clicks off. The
output of that relay is a dead-man's switch that powers down the vehicle. The
end result is a hardware fail-safe if the CPU misbehaves. There are other
tests to confirm that the relay isn't frozen, that the RC-Diode circuit isn't
frozen, etc.

So, in theory, if a high-school sophomore designed the vehicle, you might have
a problem. Otherwise, I think you don't give the engineers that design these
systems enough credit.

~~~
jonknee
... And yet there are out of control cars without the pedal being stuck.

"Well, I have many models of Prius that got recalled, but I have a new model
that didn't get recalled. This new model has an accelerator that goes wild,
but only under certain conditions of cruise control. And I can repeat it over
and over and over again--safely."

"This is software. It's not a bad accelerator pedal. It's very scary, but
luckily for me, I can hit the brakes," he said.

\-- Steve Wozniak

<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10445564-64.html>

~~~
cryptnoob
This is more believable to me, as the "set-point" for cruise control is not
dependent upon throttle position, but instead, is remembered by the computer.
There's nothing to check against to insure believability.

More suspect, in my opinion, is that in a cruise control, you have a feedback
system, based on car speed. The car speed is almost certainly redundantly
sensed, so that's no worries, but the feedback loop itself could potentially
go oscillatory if there were other variables introduced that hadn't been
designed for. Those variables could be pretty subtle. For example, maybe the
gear motor that you use to mechanically control the engine gets sourced from
another distributor, and they give you a better one, that has more torque.
Perhaps that throws off the stability analysis that you had done. Tons of
things could change somewhere between the 500K's car and 1M's car you
produced, lots of different vendors and permutations could come into play that
could throw off the stability of a cruise control, I would think.

EDIT: They're probably using feedback in the control motors as well (servos),
so that's a non-realistic example, but it illustrates the problem.

------
dustingetz
jeez, the tone of that article is absolutely absurd.

