Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

ktar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–227 of 227 posts

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#221

Post by bogomipz »

jdnenej wrote: post #198
bogomipz wrote: post #154

The new New South Wales Roads Minister Andrew Constance emphatically states: “>There is no doubt drink-driving as far as I’m concerned is on a par with mobile phone use, and that’s why we want everyone to be aware that you’re going to get busted doing this anytime, anywhere,” Constance told Australian Broadcasting Corp." But the further down we read: >"Photos that show suspected illegal behavior are referred for veri…

They don't need to increase the price, just make it a 6 month loss of licence for the first time, 1 year for the second and 5 for the 3rd. 4th offence should probably be life time loss of license.

Sorry yes that it what I meant by price, the total penalty.

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#222

Post by Skunkleton »

WatchDog wrote: post #113
Sendotsh wrote: post #89

Good. People in Australia don't take driving seriously. I spend a lot of time on the road, and have lived all over Australia, and the one defining thing I've found in common all over the country is that people are WAY too casual about driving. Sydney and Melbourne being the worst by far, with it being so bad it has become entertainment[0] On any given commute you'll see dozens of people playing with their phone while…

As an Australian that has driven in multiple countries, I would choose driving among Australians over many if not most other countries. US drivers are much more aggressive, particularly in cities like LA. UK drivers seem roughly equivalent. Drivers in Germany and the Netherlands seem to drive safer. Driving in South Korea, China, and India is terrifying.

I've never driven in Australia, but I have driven pretty extensively in NZ. Are the drivers similar there? If so, I would agree with you.

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#223

Post by pbhjpbhj »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #211
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean interval speed cameras? I'd be fine with that if we first can have a conversation on speed limits. It seems on the road network places put in interval cameras and drop the speed limit by 10+mph. On motorways we get a de facto 80mph road going down to 50, regardless of conditions and traffic flow. That seems way to extreme a limitation IMO. Though if the trains were cheaper it wouldn't bother me!

Yeah, I mean the contraption that identifies you at two points of a straight segment of a road and fines you if your average speed between the points exceeded the limit. Sure, we should have a conversation on speed limits. I know some places use them as revenue sources, and this would have to disappear. But speed limits are sometimes (usually?) set for safety reasons too. And we can't move forward on getting the spee…

Agreed, TeMPOraL for PM!

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#224

Post by rstuart4133 »

Sendotsh wrote: post #89

Good. People in Australia don't take driving seriously. I spend a lot of time on the road, and have lived all over Australia, and the one defining thing I've found in common all over the country is that people are WAY too casual about driving. Sydney and Melbourne being the worst by far, with it being so bad it has become entertainment[0] On any given commute you'll see dozens of people playing with their phone while…

> People in Australia don't take driving seriously.

I guess that means they don't take it seriously enough for your tastes, but if you've driven elsewhere in the word you would find Australian's take adhering to the road rules _very_ seriously compared to just about anywhere else.

Other's here have called in nanny state'ism. Maybe that's true, but it's also true the expansive nature of the country means we drive long distances at high speeds on wide roads. Someone deliberately driving down the wrong side of the road, which I have seen numerous times in countries like France and Italy would get someone killed in Australia. A drunk drivers mistake at 50km/hr it likely to end up at the panel beaters, at 100km/hr at the morgue. Even in major Australian city like Brisbane I'd say I do most of my driving at 100km/hr. So there is a point to nanny state'ism.

On the other hand if you had driven in highly congested environments like France and Italy tend to have, you would notice a little extra chaos on the roads actually helps. Other drivers are seem to be far more accommodating of you breaking the rules because you've been sitting there for 5 minutes and it is your turn.

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#225

Post by kazinator »

Lio wrote: post #188
SamReidHughes wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stopped vehicle at a green light also increased the probability of collision. Most collisions require two unsafe drivers. One to swerve out of their lane, another who thoughtlessly drive down the highway alongside another car; that sort of thing.

No, sorry if you drive into the back of another car that’s your fault for being too close and not being prepared to stop. If someone drives into a stationary car just because the lights go green they are an incompetent driver because they haven’t checked the road is clear before moving off. The car in front could have stalled, the driver could have had a heart attack, a child could have run into the road 3 cars down…

A very simple and necessary general principle is that if two or more vehicles are involved in a collision, if it can be shown that some of them violated the traffic code (committed a ticketable moving offense) and some did not, then the liability should be apportioned among just those drivers which violated the traffic code.

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#226

Post by NikolaNovak »

lovehashbrowns wrote: post #123
NikolaNovak wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies if it sounded condescending; it was the "I really don't understand how..." part of the post that, in turn, sounded to me as condescending - as if there's no plausible way anybody would prefer a cop over a camera, to the point you can't even understand why somebody would think so. It sounded dishonest because I feel, and perhaps I'm wrong, that with some effort to understand another person's perspective, mos…

I literally don't understand why somebody would prefer a cop over a camera on every street corner of the US. And just to be double clear, I understand the downsides of having everything on video; in this hypothetical situation, it's my opinion that having a cop on every street corner of the US is the greater evil, while having a camera in their place is a lesser evil. Both evils, both absurd hypothetical scenarios. B…

Well, then, I suppose I was / am condescending, with a dose of pity and sadness:

- If your message is "I vehemently disagree, with every bone in my body, with the idea of having cops instead of cameras" - sure, that's a valid viewpoint we can have a lot of fun productively discussing, even if we never in the end agree.

- If your message is, as you repeatedly indicate, "I literally don't understand [the other point of view]", there is no discussion to be had. From where I'm standing, you are either unwilling, or incapable, of making the effort. A physical/sociopathic lack of empathy, or inability or willingness to process and examine different perspectives, or incredible amount of stubbornness, whatever it may be. If details of other side are presented to you, and you still "literally don't understand" it, then... I don't know, discussion is done one way or another? We are failing on point one of the pyramid of productive/honest discussions and arguments [1].

[note in this framework, understanding, and agreeing, are entirely separate considerations]

1: http://www.openculture.com/2019/06/how-to-argue-with-kindnes...

Re: Australia uses new technology to catch drivers on phones

#227

Post by jaimex2 »

tebs1200 wrote: post #163
jaimex2 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's never about safety. These cameras bring in billions in revenue. If you want to argue that they're not about revenue raising tell me why the Police here strike for pay rises by warning motorists of where the cameras are? https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/police-threaten-... They've done this for at least 3 pay rises in the past and they actually have followed through.

How would you propose authorities stop people from using their phones while driving without: 1. Detecting when people are using their phone while driving? 2. Imposing a penalty when people are caught? Applying a high fine for infringements is a good deterrent. It's definitely about safety as much (if not more) than revenue raising. If people don't want to give revenue to the government, it's simple - don't use your p…

How about more highway patrol? You know, physical officers who can be anywhere instead of a camera on a pole thats well known.

Speed cameras just cause people to behave in a single spot. Worse they usually backlog traffic because drivers brake when approaching them "just in case"

Post reply on HN