Tesla hacker reveals what driver-facing camera is looking for

Mostly just doing something physically tiring and having a full stomach, plus being in a monotonous 1-2 hour drive is a recipe for sleep.

What you are describing still suggests an underlying medical condition or extreme indifference to the safety of others. I was being generous and assuming you were not deliberately being indifferent to the well-being other drivers.

It's not normal to fall asleep driving after only a few hours of strenuous activity followed by food.

People do potentially deadly risk reward calculus all the time. And of all potentially deadly things that people regularly do to crack down on, this one would have a pretty huge negative ROI for society. This issue impacts a non-trivial percentage of the population. You can't tell them all to change jobs or move their houses to be within whatever travel time limit. This purist notion of 'they should never be allowed to drive a car, for everyone else's protection' crumbles at the most trivial examination when you consider that you're talking about leaving millions of people jobless or in significantly worse quality of life conditions, while also completely reshuffling the housing markets and zoning. And even then, sometimes events will come up that force them to take that chance regardless, such as family emergencies.

Rather than this purist isolated-logic bullshit that would probably crash the economy if seriously enforced because you have absolutely failed to consider the first and second order effects of what you're suggesting, we actually have a viable tech solution instead.

I'm going to guess that most people who share this viewpoint are either high income earners living in a bubble who don't know what real life is like for most of the population, or are logical purists looking at this issue in isolation and not accounting for what life is like for most of the population. Life for most of the population is working paycheck to paycheck at whatever job you can get in order to make ends meet and keep your kids fed, and living in whatever housing you can get that doesn't make it impossible to get enough sleep to physically keep living due to long commute times. Being prevented from driving would absolutely destroy most affected families. You're going to do a lot more damage to society by preventing all those affected from driving than by doing nothing and letting it contribute to a small percentage of the road toll, which in itself is an insignificant percentage of the total death toll. Which is why every country on the planet has done nothing more drastic than awareness campaigns, despite being aware of this issue.

Really, this is where this entire discussion becomes moot. Fatigue and microsleep as a cause of road fatalities are a well studied issue that every developed nation is aware of and has done the calculus on. And not a single one of them decided to ban those affected from driving, because the calculus of that policy results in a massive net COST, not gain. And that calculus shifts even further now that we have fairly cheap car technology available to mitigate the issue. When you think through all this, the only conclusion is 'ban affected people from driving' is moronic and does significantly more harm than good.

tl;dr: you'll save more lives by replacing a single coal power plant with renewable energy than by implementing your policy. And you won't destroy the lives of millions of people and potentially crash the economy in the process. And there's already a viable solution on market that mitigates it almost entirely anyway. Pick your battles.

They have more detailed information elsewhere. They are generally trustworthy. Of course I boosted the cost (based on memory) a little, and literalized the value (the truth is that each additional mosquito net has a marginal reduction in the probability of a child contracting and then dying of malaria).

And it looks like I made two errors:

* I had a memory of an older model - the newer one makes it more expensive

* I misremembered the optimal strategy (it isn't anti-malaria, it's Deworm the World at $1003 / child under age 5 saved).

Unless we first institute livable wages with sane working hours and paid commute time along with free childcare.

So that survival does not demand that people abuse their bodies with lack of sleep.

agreeing that externalities like house work, parenting, commuting exist, have cost, and need to be considered in a viable economy could be a great step.

Doughnut economics is one such approach.

https://www.ted.com/talks/kate_raworth_a_healthy_economy_sho...