I do aknowledge that’s always going to be the problem when we have the human + AI driver combinations.
Safest hypothetical is 100% AIs that always follow the same rules… next safest is humans that break the rules, but in a context aware situation (IE everyone going 70 in a 55, is safer than 1 car going 55 and all other cars going 70).
Real danger though is if the AI doesn’t make good judgement calls when doing so. IE rather than deciding based on how fast other cars are going, it’s primary determination is whether the user says they are in a hurry, leading it to sometimes be the one car going 55, but if the person is in a hurry it may be the only car going 70 on a road everyone else is going 55.
It’s not speed that kills. It’s acceleration. Everyone doing 70 means nobody is an obstacle. But one person doing 55 in that situation is effectively a rolling road block. Even if they’re not hit by someone else they’ll cause accidents as people change lanes to get around them.
The impact force doubles from 55 to 70. That’s a spectacular difference. Driving cars is already the most dangerous thing we do and this talk about if computers make good judgment calls or not? They make better judgment calls than humans every time.
Just because people want to speed on the road doesn’t mean we need to accept the crazy idea that it’s somehow safe for them.
Right it’s not like anyone ever has car trouble and the road is always free of obstacles and animals!
It’s exactly like the oil pipeline people. “It’s perfectly safe unless it leaks” but they always leak!! That’s just a fact of life!
“Any road where people are doing 55 shouldn’t have pedestrians on cyclists “
Lots of roads are 55 and have sidewalks.
Hell I got a perfect example. I know one road near the airport that’s 60 until about 100 yards from the school zone where it drops to 20 then picks back up. No one slows down. They blast 70 straight thru (people add 10mph to every posted sign around here because the cops “won’t pull you over for just going a little over”)
So my question to you… on that road what is the safe solution? Should cars slow down and risk a wreck that way? Blast thru the school crosswalk going 70? Or do we need to just close the school and move it away from all those important drivers in a hurry?
Go the speed limit. Safety laws are written in blood buddy. They exist because people kept dying.
lol do you really think that’s some kind of rebuttal?
Let’s break it down. Essentially:
“We can’t ticket everyone”
“Yes we can”
“But we don’t like to get tickets so we vote against tickets. Therefore you can’t do the reasonable things leaving our solution of speeding as the only option! so check and mate!”
It’s impossible because you want to keep it impossible, so you can say it’s impossible, so your idea of just speeding all the time is the only way.
I do aknowledge that’s always going to be the problem when we have the human + AI driver combinations.
Safest hypothetical is 100% AIs that always follow the same rules… next safest is humans that break the rules, but in a context aware situation (IE everyone going 70 in a 55, is safer than 1 car going 55 and all other cars going 70).
Real danger though is if the AI doesn’t make good judgement calls when doing so. IE rather than deciding based on how fast other cars are going, it’s primary determination is whether the user says they are in a hurry, leading it to sometimes be the one car going 55, but if the person is in a hurry it may be the only car going 70 on a road everyone else is going 55.
It’s not speed that kills. It’s acceleration. Everyone doing 70 means nobody is an obstacle. But one person doing 55 in that situation is effectively a rolling road block. Even if they’re not hit by someone else they’ll cause accidents as people change lanes to get around them.
“It’s not the speed that kills”
Yes it is. It’s the speed and the weight.
The impact force doubles from 55 to 70. That’s a spectacular difference. Driving cars is already the most dangerous thing we do and this talk about if computers make good judgment calls or not? They make better judgment calls than humans every time.
Just because people want to speed on the road doesn’t mean we need to accept the crazy idea that it’s somehow safe for them.
Yes but if everyone is doing 70 there won’t be impacts between the cars.
Speed is also not part of force. That’s acceleration times mass. Sudden stops and starts are deadly because of acceleration, not speed.
Obviously any road where people are doing 55 shouldn’t have pedestrians or cyclists.
“Between cars”
Right it’s not like anyone ever has car trouble and the road is always free of obstacles and animals!
It’s exactly like the oil pipeline people. “It’s perfectly safe unless it leaks” but they always leak!! That’s just a fact of life!
“Any road where people are doing 55 shouldn’t have pedestrians on cyclists “
Lots of roads are 55 and have sidewalks.
Hell I got a perfect example. I know one road near the airport that’s 60 until about 100 yards from the school zone where it drops to 20 then picks back up. No one slows down. They blast 70 straight thru (people add 10mph to every posted sign around here because the cops “won’t pull you over for just going a little over”)
So my question to you… on that road what is the safe solution? Should cars slow down and risk a wreck that way? Blast thru the school crosswalk going 70? Or do we need to just close the school and move it away from all those important drivers in a hurry?
Go the speed limit. Safety laws are written in blood buddy. They exist because people kept dying.
Bad road design is an entirely different problem.
And I’ve got a question for you: it’s rush hour and everyone is doing 70 in a 55. How do you enforce this? Pull everyone over?
“Pull everyone over “
I love how you phrase that like it’s some ridiculous impossibility lol.
Speed cameras. Send them all a ticket.
“Bad road design is a different problem”
Yeah just like crashing is a different problem lol.
“It’s not my fault that orphanage was flammable! I just like playing with fireworks! They should build better orphanages.
Then why haven’t they put speed cameras everywhere?
Because a local government wouldn’t last an election cycle if they did that.
lol do you really think that’s some kind of rebuttal?
Let’s break it down. Essentially:
“We can’t ticket everyone”
“Yes we can”
“But we don’t like to get tickets so we vote against tickets. Therefore you can’t do the reasonable things leaving our solution of speeding as the only option! so check and mate!”
It’s impossible because you want to keep it impossible, so you can say it’s impossible, so your idea of just speeding all the time is the only way.