8 ms·

It's on the high end, but it's only a factor of three off of the roughly $7 million the EPA uses in cost-benefit analysis. Perhaps a bad call, but not wildly i

It's on the high end, but it's only a factor of three off of the roughly $7 million the EPA uses in cost-benefit analysis. Perhaps a bad call, but not wildly innumerate.

mikeash 12y ago
Not to mention that $100 per vehicle is probably wildly high. The quality on these things isn't great (and doesn't need to be). If I can buy a fully featured IP camera at a retail price of $50 complete with pan and tilt, I doubt car makers are going to pay more than $10 or so wholesale for a lesser camera with no networking and no motors. The screen is going to cost something too, but most cars already have those now.
- x0x0 12y ago
  hell, you can get a chinese android phone for $100 -- and that includes the camera and color display, plus all of the rest (battery, storage, wifi, wireless, gps, bluetooth, etc). Anyone who claims adding this to a car costs $100 is ridiculous.
  - elithrar 12y ago
    $100, including labour, does not seem so incredible. Auto electricians may charge more than that per hour, too.
    - x0x0 12y ago
      What does that have to do with manufacturing a car, or sliding in a prefabbed camera into an area of the car already covered with cabling (brake lights, backup lights, rear door open indicator switch)?
      - elithrar 12y ago
        The grandparent touched on the costs for upgrading existing vehicles.
        mikeash 12y ago
        That would be weird if so, because the rule doesn't require adding it to existing vehicles, and nobody else is talking about upgrading existing vehicles. The important question regarding this rule is how much it costs to add a backup camera to a vehicle design for production of new units.
- ams6110 12y ago
  The raw parts cost may be less. But it'll have to be covered by new-car warranty so it can't be complete garbage. It will also have to be worked into the design of the car and the manufacturing process, which are one-time costs but they are costs. Automakers will also have to amortize in the expected cost of defending lawsuits and paying awards to car owners who will claim the camera failed causing them to have an accident, etc.
  - x0x0 12y ago
    backup cameras are already designed into basically every new car there is; right now, it's an option not a requirement

It's on the high end, but it's only a factor of three off of the roughly $7 million the EPA uses in cost-benefit analysis. Perhaps a bad call, but not wildly innumerate.

mikeash 12y ago

Not to mention that $100 per vehicle is probably wildly high. The quality on these things isn't great (and doesn't need to be). If I can buy a fully featured IP camera at a retail price of $50 complete with pan and tilt, I doubt car makers are going to pay more than $10 or so wholesale for a lesser camera with no networking and no motors. The screen is going to cost something too, but most cars already have those now.

x0x0 12y ago
hell, you can get a chinese android phone for $100 -- and that includes the camera and color display, plus all of the rest (battery, storage, wifi, wireless, gps, bluetooth, etc). Anyone who claims adding this to a car costs $100 is ridiculous.
- elithrar 12y ago
  $100, including labour, does not seem so incredible. Auto electricians may charge more than that per hour, too.
  - x0x0 12y ago
    What does that have to do with manufacturing a car, or sliding in a prefabbed camera into an area of the car already covered with cabling (brake lights, backup lights, rear door open indicator switch)?
    - elithrar 12y ago
      The grandparent touched on the costs for upgrading existing vehicles.
      - mikeash 12y ago
        That would be weird if so, because the rule doesn't require adding it to existing vehicles, and nobody else is talking about upgrading existing vehicles. The important question regarding this rule is how much it costs to add a backup camera to a vehicle design for production of new units.
ams6110 12y ago
The raw parts cost may be less. But it'll have to be covered by new-car warranty so it can't be complete garbage. It will also have to be worked into the design of the car and the manufacturing process, which are one-time costs but they are costs. Automakers will also have to amortize in the expected cost of defending lawsuits and paying awards to car owners who will claim the camera failed causing them to have an accident, etc.
- x0x0 12y ago
  backup cameras are already designed into basically every new car there is; right now, it's an option not a requirement