Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill • Hacker News Board

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#31

Post by zrail » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

smt88 wrote: post #12

cabaalis wrote: post #10

Even if one agrees these are good things and needed, why does our congress not pass these laws individually so they can be voted and understood for their own worth?

Lots of reasons, one of which is that the Senate is rigged to favor rural places and doesn't represent the majority of Americans anymore. Even reasonable, popular bills are unable to pass.

The Senate was rigged from the jump to favor states with lower populations. That clause is also the only part that is immune from the amendment process. It's never represented the people, it's always represented the states.

The problem at the moment is that the person in charge of one of the two equally sized factions in power has zero interest in doing any kind of leadership or legislating. That's why nothing is happening.

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#32

Post by lm28469 » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

agumonkey wrote: post #23

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #4

This is terrible overreach and a good example of magical thinking about the abilities of AI. Even if the false positive rate of such a system was only 0.1% per driving session, an extraordinarily ambitious goal for any AI system, that still translates to an incredible number of false positives across all drivers. Someone who drives twice a day for work would be expected to hit a false positive every couple of years o…

maybe match the low reliability of classification with a low impact rule, if the system thinks you're drunk you just have to drive slower ?

Yeah make them do 30mph on the highway this will surely reduce the danger /s

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#33

Post by eplanit » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:36 PM UTC

akomtu wrote: post #8

"Safety" has become an euphemism for "control". It's as if politicians speak a coded language: one of them says "we want safer cars" and others translate that to "we want more control over cars". If someone says "to protect children we need these measures" others understand that it really means "we need these authoritarian measures".

You're right, and that's been true for millennia. "Think of the children" is like a damn magic sword of rhetoric.

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#34

Post by hermannj314 » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:37 PM UTC

Around 40,000 American die each year on our roads, this has been pretty consistent for decades.

As we add more safety features, the marginal cost per life saved is going up. We got a big bang for the seat belt. But backup cameras cost around $5.7 million dollars in cost for every one life saved.

I commend NHTSA for their hard work, but I can't help but feel government safety mandates in cars are now scraping the bottom of the barrel in cost-effective life saving measures.

If I had to offer an alternative, SAMHSA, the government org focused on substance abuse seems to be under-funded and highlights numerous ways additional dollars can save lives.

So rather than scrape the bottom of barrel on making cars safer, perhaps we can instead spend that money on substance abuse interventions with youth and college age students that lead to alcoholism, binge drinking, and drunk driving. Maybe we would get more bang for our buck.

Unless this part of the bill isn't actually about saving lives, but then I'd have to ask why a Representative from Michigan would have an incentive to make cars more expensive other can wanting to save lives.

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#35

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:40 PM UTC

nathanaldensr wrote: post #21

daenz wrote: post #7

It appears the slope actually is slippery.

Yep. Slippery slope "fallacy" is actually nothing more than "you are not allowed to be human and extrapolate from trends."

No, its not.

“Fallacy” is not “you are not allowed to”, only “it is a source of error to”.

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#36

Post by exabrial » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

This bill keeps getting worse with all the wreckage that is getting included. Please please, start including the names of the reps pushing these idiotic measures as it's the only way to stop them.

And before someone accuses me of "not wanting to stop drunk driving", of course I do. The way to do that is to address the underlying causes of alcoholism, not patching the symptoms.

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#37

Post by mmastrac » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

hermannj314 wrote: post #34

Around 40,000 American die each year on our roads, this has been pretty consistent for decades. As we add more safety features, the marginal cost per life saved is going up. We got a big bang for the seat belt. But backup cameras cost around $5.7 million dollars in cost for every one life saved. I commend NHTSA for their hard work, but I can't help but feel government safety mandates in cars are now scraping the bott…

Backup cameras probably saved the economy from an insane amount of damages. I've never had an accident at speed, but I do have one insurance claim from reversing into a vehicle (sadly totaled another car because I had a Blazer with brutal rear visibility).

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#38

Post by stuaxo » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

hermannj314 wrote: post #34

Around 40,000 American die each year on our roads, this has been pretty consistent for decades. As we add more safety features, the marginal cost per life saved is going up. We got a big bang for the seat belt. But backup cameras cost around $5.7 million dollars in cost for every one life saved. I commend NHTSA for their hard work, but I can't help but feel government safety mandates in cars are now scraping the bott…

The other argument is vision zero: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero

Helsinki and Oslo have got to zero road deaths.

Now, it may not be possible to hit zero, but it's the only number worth aiming for (aim high or you won't know how far you can go).

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#39

Post by parineum » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

akomtu wrote: post #8

"Safety" has become an euphemism for "control". It's as if politicians speak a coded language: one of them says "we want safer cars" and others translate that to "we want more control over cars". If someone says "to protect children we need these measures" others understand that it really means "we need these authoritarian measures".

"has become"

Re: Drunk-driver detectors for cars mandated in infrastructure bill

#40

Post by stuaxo » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 2:43 PM UTC

mmastrac wrote: post #37

hermannj314 wrote: post #34

Around 40,000 American die each year on our roads, this has been pretty consistent for decades. As we add more safety features, the marginal cost per life saved is going up. We got a big bang for the seat belt. But backup cameras cost around $5.7 million dollars in cost for every one life saved. I commend NHTSA for their hard work, but I can't help but feel government safety mandates in cars are now scraping the bott…

Backup cameras probably saved the economy from an insane amount of damages. I've never had an accident at speed, but I do have one insurance claim from reversing into a vehicle (sadly totaled another car because I had a Blazer with brutal rear visibility).

Exactly, 5.7 millions is probably nothing compared to a years worth of reversing based accidents.