So your complaint is that those (here) with an intimate understanding of tech and its capabilities are sharing their qualified and often nuanced opinion about tech implementatiioms without exclusively following the market's "everything is flawless and there are no anti-features" rhetoric? A love of tech should mean people care to point out the problems seen from an educated vantage - what do you expect? Are backup cameras flawless? Is collision detection flawless? Do humans lose anything by permanent delegation of their skills? What exactly are you saying is a problem here?

No they are not perfect, but they do have a proven track record. I expect a better reason than "I am a really good driver and don't need those things so they should not be mandatory" which I've seen here several times.

> back up cameras

I have literally never heard a complaint about reversing cameras in my life

Me neither, but I have heard plenty of complaints about backup cameras being required in all new cars.

The idea is that the cameras require a large display on the dashboard. If you could sell a car without them, we might have a cheaper class of small street-legal vehicles with simpler controls.

Sadly, with electric vehicles being thousands of kg heavier than ICE vehicles, kei-style cars would probably get a lot of people killed if they were introduced to the US today.

I think the objections to things like this is the tech for tech sake.

Like with backup cameras that we just don't want to pay for. I've been driving for 20+ years and never once bumped my car. So the safety aspect isn't really relevant. But when I get told "We added this backup camera for free, so you're saving 500$". Honestly I'd rather have you shave 500$ off the price of the car.

I've actually had that conversation about bluetooth in my current car. 8 years old and I've never used the bluetooth. It was tech for tech sake. It adds no value.

Back up cameras are not there to stop you from bumping into things but stopping you from running over a kid