>>>>>>That's one thing that often worries me about DBW (drive-by-wire -- anlaogous to FBW "fly-by-wire" used on modern aircraft). It's been reliable on military and commercial aircraft -- but then they're usually inspected on a regular basis, meaning that if there are problems, they're often spotted before they become serious. When it comes to personal vehicles, it's likely a different story -- there is high probability that they don't get inspected as often as necessary (we probably know at least a few people who neglect regular maintenance such as oil changes or rotating the tires). For those cases I can see that the only "safe" option is to default DBW system to auto-shutdown when a fault is detected -- however that will result in customer perception that car is unreliable.
>>>>>
>>>>>And of course they won't do anything like that - perception = sales = $$$ (or €€€, though SFRSFRSFR also makes an interesting sound).
>>>>
>>>>Which is one of the reasons why auto manufacturers in the USA resisted adding seatbelts as standard equipment.
>>>
>>>"Once you embrace the idea that your customers deserve to die, it frees your mind to invent splendidly profitable products." -- Dogbert
>>
>>As soon as you add a safety feature you become responsible for safety...
>
>This absurdity is illustrated here in winter.
>
>A commercial premises has no responsibility to clear ice and snow from outside it. However if they do but not well and you slip on it you can sue them. So usually nobody does it.

Here that is handled by city ordinances and in most cases, commercial premises must clear ice and snow within a specified period of time.