Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders • Hacker News Board

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#311

Post by tintor » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:13 AM UTC

dataflow wrote: post #220

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's frustrating for everyone behind them in the best case at best... and I imagine possibly even more dangerous in the worst case, no? No. Waymo put the myth to bed [1]. Even if you might piss off a speeder, driving the limit in speeding flow remains safer as the handling advantage (frequency) and exponentially-lower energy in the event of a collision (magnitude) dwarf other effects. [1] https://waymo.com/blog/2…

Your link is about Waymo. It doesn't imply the same is true for human drivers. When I search around whether driving too slowly is too dangerous, basically every source I see says it is. Random example: https://www.allstate.com/resources/car-insurance/dangers-of-... Anecdotally, I see people dangerously tailgate slow drivers too; it makes sense that everyone warns against slow driving.

Physics works the same whether you are Waymo or human.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#312

Post by Xylakant » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:14 AM UTC

BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #190

Xylakant wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speeding is widely accepted, because it seems such a low level offense. 50km/h instead of 30, it’s only 20 more. But the physics are against you - the energy of the vehicle grows quadratic with the speed. At 30, you need about 18 meters to come to a stop. So you can prevent an accident if a person appears about 20 meters from your hood. At 50, you’ll run them over with a remaining speed of more than 30km/h. Speeding…

Road conditions change. Sometimes it’s the middle of the night and nobody is on the county road, so you can run your brights. Sometimes a particular section of road has high visibility that makes a higher speed safer, while other sections are best taken under the limit. Some vehicles have better headlights than others, different stopping distances. Your logic only says “lower is safer,” it provides no means by which…

You’re trying to apply the “I am a good driver and my judgment is better than other people’s” argument - but the majority of people believe they’re an above average driver. That’s a dangerous fallacy. Now, you might truly be, but your argument paves the way for everyone else to say the same. After all, nothing happened so far. And that other driver might be the one that misjudges and crashes into you.

On country roads and highways, physics work even worse against you. Most People have good feeling for how long stopping distances are and how fast they increase at higher speeds. Increasing you speed from 100km/h to 110 increases your stopping distance by about 25 meters from 130 to 155. That puts it well above the outer limits for your brights - meaning by the time you could see any potential obstacle, you can’t stop any more. At highway speeds, in daylight conditions, high speeds can put an obstacle beyond the arc of a bend. At the same time, time savings are diminishing. Running 110 saves you 5.5 minutes on the hour compared to 100 with diminishing returns the faster you go.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#313

Post by mitthrowaway2 » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:15 AM UTC

allenrb wrote: post #224

Speed limiters built into cars. Anti-infringement technology built into general-purpose computers. And yet, guns and ammo freely available and unrestricted outside of automatic weapons and the like? Yeah. Can’t wait to move off-grid someday. (Yes, obviously American) I’ve got enough sense to keep it slow and safe in populated areas, yet occasionally open it up elsewhere when conditions are right. Guess that’s another…

What do you mean by "when conditions are right"?

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#314

Post by rpmisms » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:17 AM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #300

allenrb wrote: post #224

Speed limiters built into cars. Anti-infringement technology built into general-purpose computers. And yet, guns and ammo freely available and unrestricted outside of automatic weapons and the like? Yeah. Can’t wait to move off-grid someday. (Yes, obviously American) I’ve got enough sense to keep it slow and safe in populated areas, yet occasionally open it up elsewhere when conditions are right. Guess that’s another…

> I’ve got enough sense to keep it slow and safe in populated areas, yet occasionally open it up elsewhere when conditions are right. Is this a reference to your driving, or your shooting?

Both. Driving is much scarier in terms of kinetic energy, anyway.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#315

Post by tsimionescu » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:18 AM UTC

throwaway2037 wrote: post #299

protocolture wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They demonstrated the japanese system on topgear once, and it was disgustingly accurate. They drove onto a track and bing it opened up. No lag or anything.

> it was disgustingly accurate Real question (no trolling): Is this sarcastic? If not, I don't really understand this English.

This is a common turn of phrase in many languages in informal speech, using negative adjectives for emphasis, instead of positive ones. It carries a light humourus tone, as it kind of implies that the thing "had no right" to be as good as it was, so the speaker is "chastising" it for being so good.

I don't think it's specific to English in any way, but maybe it's also not common in every language or culture. It may also be more common in the UK and certain other English-speaking countries, that use irony a lot in regular (informal) speech.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#316

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:21 AM UTC

mizzao wrote: post #292

shermantanktop wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never met a person taking high risk actions who thinks they are unqualified to do so. But they always think some other people are.

I forget the scientific term for this — but 95% of people think they are above average at doing X skill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconfidence_effect

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#317

Post by mitthrowaway2 » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:22 AM UTC

derwiki wrote: post #283

freddie_mercury wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going the speed limit is an onerous burden?

It’s gotten me aggressively tailgated and subjected to dangerous passing.

Sounds like it would have been better and safer for society if the tailgater had a speed limiter.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#318

Post by rpmisms » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:23 AM UTC

Teever wrote: post #162

astura wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TFA says 75% of people with suspended licenses drive anyways.

Sounds like 75% of people with a suspended license need to spend some time out in jail where they can ponder their life choices.

I had a suspended license for failing to return a license plate. I have never had a moving violation in my life. I continued to drive like normal until the DMV realized that I had turned in the other plate in a two-plate state.

Should I go to jail?

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#319

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:23 AM UTC

exsomet wrote: post #271

atoav wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Hardware designer I don't think that is the problem nowadays. Make it physically hard to remove and add a gps tracker to the unit and if it doesn't move for a few days, have them proove to you it wasn't tampered with. Then the only way to do it is to break the thing open and simulate trips that match yours all the time, which requires you to MITM the connection between the GPS and the microcontroller. Aside fro…

You’re forgetting a step - which, being a hardware designer instead of a lawyer, is understandable. The fourth amendment means that there should never be a situation where you are arbitrarily required to provide the government access to, or information about, the ways that you use or modify private property like a vehicle.

We already require breathalyzer interlocks be installed for habitual DUI drivers in a majority of states. This is an extension of that same legal principle. Road access is a privilege (as evidenced by the requirement to have a driver’s license and vehicle tags).

https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/state-ignition-interlock...

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#320

Post by illiac786 » Mon, Apr 28, 2025, 5:23 AM UTC

I don’t get that. Repeat offender => temporary removal of driving license. Done. You can make it progressive, remove it for a week, next time 3, etc. I guarantee this will calm people down.