this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2024
151 points (91.3% liked)

World News

38237 readers
2625 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

All new cars must have the devices from 7 July, adding fuel economy as well as safety. Will mpg become the new mph?

In the highway code and the law courts, there is no doubt what those big numbers in red circles mean. As a quick trip up any urban street or motorway with no enforcement cameras makes clear though, many drivers still regard speed signs as an aspiration rather than a limit.

Technology that will be required across Europe from this weekend may change that culture, because from 7 July all new cars sold in the EU and in Northern Ireland must have a range of technical safety features fitted as standard. The most notable of these is intelligent speed assistance – or colloquially, a speed limiter.

The rest of the UK is theoretically free, as ministers once liked to put it, to make the most of its post-Brexit freedoms, but the integrated nature of car manufacturing means new vehicles here will also be telling their drivers to take their foot off the accelerator. Combining satnav maps with a forward camera to read the road signs, they will automatically sound an alarm if driven too fast for the zone they are in.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The one thing nobody is fixing is the constant phone use in cars. This issue is far more common than speeding and creates jams and dangerous situations all the time. Makes me hate being a part of traffic. I tend to speed by about 10% on highways but never in 30 and 50 zones. The very idea of a "smart" car taking control of my brake, throttle or steering makes me wanna barf.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Cars are, themselves, the problem. We've created a two ton rolling death machine and now we're stuck adding more and more features to address the original sin of unleashing them across the country to begin with.

The very idea of a “smart” car taking control of my brake, throttle or steering makes me wanna barf.

Its that, or people will be forced to endure the unlimited nightmare indignity of taking the train/bus.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

My car lets me set a threshold - currently +7mph. I can see on the dashboard when I’ve exceeded my self-imposed threshold, vs when I am between that and the actual speed limit. Actually I wish it would do a bit more, like turn yellow.

I also ignore it in crowded areas, and pedestrian crossings, school zones, construction zones with people working, etc.

Although I’m really pissed at whoever thought the wide straight parkway leading through the woods up to my workplace is 15 mph. That’s the reason people ignore speed limits

However it is not set by anyone but me, never limits the vehicle, doesn’t make noise, and doesn’t get reported to anyone (as far as I know).

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Governors aren't anything new. It's not taking control, rather just limiting speed.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They wont be new when most people have used and adapted to them. Limiting speed is taking control. I can imagine situations when having the ability to speed up can save your life or avoid a crash (think overtaking, avoiding falling obstacles or percieved danger from other vehicles with distracted drivers). Theres's a lot more about this then just limiting speed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Or it could just be a limiter on top speed. I know there are a few Chevrolets (like the volt) that limit top speed to around 90mph. I'd argue that's pretty reasonable, as I don't believe there is a public road where the speed limit is that high in the US. However, I do agree that the bigger issue is phone use and how no one seems to have a simple answer for fixing it (probably need a mandated mode which limits functions when the GPS detects you going over a certain speed, but which would require a large amount of industry cooperation which probably isn't available).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

mandated mode which limits functions when the GPS detects you going over a certain speed

Lol, this sounds like very American thinking. Yet y'all still make cars with 5 seats.

Should we be locking functionality for people taking a bus or a train?

Should we unlock the functionality again when they go ABOVE a certain speed? Because I'm pretty sure GPS works on planes, too.

How about someone driving who wants to disable some annoying app that the kids in the back seat are using, and knowing that it'd get disabled as long as they go fast enough, speeds up the car beyond the speed limit?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Again, it isn't an easy solution, but the problem is insanely prevalent. I used to have a 30 min each way commute, and I'd say it was pretty safe to say at least 20% of the drivers I would drive alongside (mind you, above 65mph and generally in larger vehicles) were on their phones and pretty obviously distracted. It is very, very dangerous, and cops don't really care to stop anyone doing it because its very hard to stop.

Also, what do you mean by 5 seats? I don't really get the reference.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Also, what do you mean by 5 seats? I don't really get the reference.

It's a reference to the fact that most cars have five seats.

The driver's seat, the front passenger's seat, and then three more seats in the back.

Your solution assumes that the only time a person's phone would be moving as fast as a car would be if that person were driving. Yet there are 4 other seats in a car that could be reasonably occupied by people who each have phones that would be moving just as fast as the driver's.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

While true, they aren't a huge risk to others. I've driven nearish drunk drivers, stoned drivers, and plenty of people on their phones, and while the ones on their phones weren't usually as bad as the drunk ones, they are ridiculously common and seem to be getting worse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Definitely agree with you. I don't have a better solution, but I think yours wouldn't be reasonable at all.

Where I live, the biggest problem is enforcement. But even before smartphones became prevalent, we didn't have enforcement of people running reds and stop signs if it "wasn't busy", ignoring yield signs entirely, or looking left while making sharp right turns.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's a stretch, but it is much more reasonable than simply monitoring all of the faces of users as to what they are doing while in their cars. Which is a strategy that is used by a lot of the newer tesla and other cars for autopilot and the like, in large part because auto manufacturers don't want to be blamed for their customer's stupidity. I can absolutely see that being effective, but very invasive into people's privacy, and eventually something a politician pushes. At this point, enforcement really isn't enough and the only way to truly fix it kinda is some passive limitations. I'm not saying complete lock down of functionality, but make there be some safeguard that only passengers can get away with for more than just changing music or receiving calls if the GPS is reading more than 20-30 mph.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

If passengers have a way to bypass it, then drivers will be doing it too, no matter how difficult it is to unlock.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

The loaner car I just got when bringing my vehicle in for some warranty service, was set by the dealer to max out at 85mph. Given that there’s no road above 65 in my state, that seems reasonable.

Actually my car has parental controls that I’ve never considered using until now. I’m not going to nanny my teen drivers but surely they don’t need to exceed speed limit +20mph

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

If it limits your speed, it's taking control of your speed, otherwise it's not really limiting your speed.
Basic logic 101.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Governors don't "take control". You don't get to 101mph and it goes oh better reduce his speed. It prevents you from getting there.

Regardless, I re-read the article and it's far more advanced than a governor. This article is indeed talking about something that takes control (uses technology to try and determine speed limits for example).