How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking” • Hacker News Board

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#431

Post by andrewaylett » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 5:47 PM UTC

richrichardsson wrote: post #80

randomdrake wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> slow down cars in urban areas This is actually happening. Portland has recently fallen in line with other cities, like Seattle, and lowered thousands of miles of streets from 25 MPH to 20 MPH. http://www.oregonlive.com/commuting/index.ssf/2018/01/portla...

In the UK a lot of residential areas have introduced 20mph limits (down from 30mph), close to no-one (except learner drivers) obey this new limit! :(

Generally it only takes one driver wanting to stick to the limit for everyone else to do so too, because overtaking is contraindicated. Which isn't to say that it never happens :(.

I live in Edinburgh, which has been gradually introducing 20mph limits over the last couple of years, and I've actually taken to them much better than I'd expected to: they don't reduce my average speed all that much, especially as the arterial roads are still 30mph, and they're much more pleasant when I'm out of the car.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#432

Post by andrewaylett » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 5:56 PM UTC

dingaling wrote: post #54

mattmanser wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought jaywalking is only a thing in the US? I'm not sure who's less informed, you or me, I have no idea about the prevalence of the idea in other countries. It's not a crime to "jaywalk" in the UK, and I quote it as the concept simply doesn't exist here. Also, in the UK, if you are crossing a side street and a car wants to turn into it, officially speaking, the pedestrian has the right of way[1]. [1] https://www.…

> It's not a crime to "jaywalk" in the UK It is if on a designated motorway, motorway slipway or any other highway designated as a 'special road' under the Road Traffic Act 1984. If a person uses a special road in contravention of this section or of regulations under subsection (2) above, he shall be guilty of an offence.

I never really thought of that as "jaywalking" -- it's illegal to even be beside a motorway; you can't easily legally get into a position to walk across the road.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#433

Post by andrewaylett » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #50

makmanalp wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we could be living in a situation where pedestrians take precedence and have right of way over cars in city streets, and the opposite in highways, which I think would be much more desirable, especially in crowded cities. Perhaps even ban cars except for abutters, commercial vehicles and emergency vehicles from the densest city center areas. God that would be a relief. edit: OK, yes, obviously you can and should…

It would be chaos. You’d have some jackass walking in the middle of the street as slow as possible, meanwhile people who actually have some place to go are all sitting around waiting on some fool who wants to play hacky-sack in the street.

Generally no, because the roads you use to go places aren't designed like that. If you're facing a road designed as a shared space, you should probably be within a couple of hundred metres of one end or the other of your journey, maximum.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#434

Post by btbuildem » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #280

sigstoat wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

carjacking vehicles with constant internet connections and GPS's doesn't strike me as an extremely profitable maneuver. the whole "car detects obstacle in an untrafficed area, stops, door is opened, passenger gets out, passenger gets back in, changes destination to a place not proximate to anywhere they've ever been before" process also sounds like the sort of thing that would justifiably raise a bit of a red flag. m…

I think the idea is that they'd stop the car, incapacitate the driver, grab what they can and run like hell. Besides, if we're talking about this happening in the "bad" parts of town, the car can call 911 and broadcast is position all it likes. There won't be any immediate response. Finally, people who do this long enough will eventually figure out what to disconnect to allow themselves enough time to do what they wa…

They straight up throw a car in a cube van and drive it off to the chop shop. Not a huge leap to faraday-cage the transport vehicle.. probably acts as one already, come to think of it.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#435

Post by andrewaylett » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #180

pmyteh wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jaywalking laws would have happened sooner or later. There are no jaywalking laws in the UK. So I don't think that's true.

If a pedestrian crosses the street at a particularly inappropriate time is there a statute under which they could be fined? The "jaywalking law" in my state is that you have to use a crosswalk if it's within 300ft. In practice this means that you either use a crosswalk, or cross the street in a reasonable manner at a reasonable time. It's like speeding. If you behave reasonably you have nothing to worry about. The US…

No, for most roads, there isn't.

The Highway Code does say that you shouldn't cross within the zigzag lines of a "proper" crossing, but that's just Best Practices, and not enforceable. There are also roads where pedestrians are excluded altogether (no possibility of a footpath, no walking on the verge, fenced off apart from sliproads). The same rules exclude low-powered and slow vehicles from those roads too.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#436

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 7:28 PM UTC

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #427

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would a private locker at a station, do?

Not really, because then you either have to transfer your belongings from station to station or you have to return to the station with your locker.

I don't really see the difference. You have to return to where your car is parked, too. And you have to transfer your belongings from your car to e.g. your house and so on.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#437

Post by crankylinuxuser » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 1:43 AM UTC

intrasight wrote: post #386

crankylinuxuser wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. And automated driving will end a great deal of greed based revenue as well. And given the sensor data, proving lack of violation is trivial. The $64k question is: what will states and counties do without police citation revenue?

Automated enforcement revenue will be much higher

Indeed, but when the automated system driving verifies real-time what the limits of the road are, it is trivial for an "Auto" to dispute and provide evidence.

The only thing these auto-scammers would get are human drivers not driving precisely and accurately.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#438

Post by gknoy » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:36 AM UTC

mieseratte wrote: post #342

rootusrootus wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would bet that the Echo and devices like it are amongst the most monitored consumer devices in existence. Plenty of people either already have enough network monitoring to catch it misbehaving, or will install that monitoring just for the sake of catching it. In a weird sense it's like open source software in that regard. I haven't read all the code myself, I really on group knowledge to reassure me. Same for Echo.…

> As a practical matter the Echo and other similar devices are difficult to turn into full-time listen-and-record devices unnoticed. Why would it be harder to pwn than anything else?

I think the GP meant that it's harder for _the vendor_ to do it, because there are assuredly many privacy-attuned nerds who would run wireshark a bunch on it and notice when the $ListeningPost becomes an always-on bug.

I don't think they meant to imply that it would be hard to to cause such behavior via malicious action by 3rd parties.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#439

Post by emj » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 7:18 AM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #416

emj wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic lights are for organizing cars, that's the whole point of the article. Pedestrians and bycyclists are just bystanders that suffers greatly from them.

Waiting for the lights to turn green for your right of way (something that cars also have to do) is "suffering greatly" now?

I love cars, but they can not handle intersections at all.

For me personally it's a great injustice that cars are so valued that I am supposed to breath one of the worst kinds of air pollutions every other morning for 180 seconds while waiting for red light at just one intersection.

Re: How Automakers Invented the Crime of “Jaywalking”

#440

Post by tripzilch » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:46 AM UTC

throwaway30yo wrote: post #396

bluGill wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autonomous cars have a lot of data gathering sensors - even if the car doesn't know something is going on, logs of what happened will greatly aid the police in their efforts to track down the criminal. If carjacking becomes a problem the cars will figure it out and start locking all the doors. Or if the car is unoccupied, let the carjaker in, then notify the nearest police station it is coming in with a criminal.

You think an unoccupied car should have the ability to lock people in and take them to the police station?

Maybe in situations where someone throws a beach ball in front of your car and your immediate split-second reaction is to turn your car into a murder weapon directed at the first "hoodlum" you spot who may or may not have thrown this ball.