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

California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 371 posts

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#141

Post by JumpCrisscross »

retired wrote: post #138
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you ask someone if they'd drive without insurance, or without driver's license they look at you like you've asked them to do the impossible To wit: Europe's 1.8% (and Belgium's 0.7%) uninsured-driver rates are a fraction of America's 15% [1][2]. [1] https://www.mibi.ie/ireland-may-have-highest-level-of-uninsu... [2] https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-uninsure...

In countries like The Netherlands it is impossible to drive around uninsured. So that is probably why the number is so low.

> it is impossible to drive around uninsured

How?

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#142

Post by mlyle »

ctoth wrote: post #94
mlyle wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's not too surprising that the law treats people with diminished capacity differently. It's not a bug, it's a feature, even though it may feel upsetting. There's no winning solution in a case like that.

Well, if the law treats them differently when it comes to punishment, then maybe it should treat them differently when it comes to being able to drive in the first place?

Yup. And we do have some degree of safeguards here-- admittedly, less in California than many other states. They are: physician required reporting of disqualifying conditions, ability for other people to report concerns about capability to drive, and the requirement to show up and undergo vision testing and not flag other concerns in the process.

There's a tradeoff between reducing the very low rate of unsafe driving by the elderly and the burden added to the very old. People over 65+ are still possibly safer, overall, than teenagers.

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#143

Post by JumpCrisscross »

vector_spaces wrote: post #114
OptionOfT wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from Belgium, and even with public transportation, there are a large group of people dependent on their driver's license. But if you ask someone if they'd drive without insurance, or without driver's license they look at you like you've asked them to do the impossible. Whereas in the US no-one bats an eye when that happens. Half the time the cops just issue a ticket, and don't even tow the car. And now people who…

You are right that this happens frequently in the United States compared to Europe, but you are overstating the degree to which this culturally and legally acceptable. People who are doing this are not typically broadcasting it to others, and I can assure you that when they do, for the most part people will tend to "bat an eye" at the very least. Note that motor vehicle insurance in most of Europe is more tightly reg…

> you are overstating the degree to which this culturally and legally acceptable

In Florida it's a $150 fine [1]. If you do it again within 3 years, they charge you $250. If you do it again within that three-year period, they'll just charge you $500 each time. It's not even a crime [2].

[1] https://www.valuepenguin.com/auto-insurance/florida/penaltie...

[2] https://www.kevinkuliklaw.com/is-it-a-crime-to-drive-without...

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#144

Post by BoorishBears »

tallowen wrote: post #127

Bike Lanes have turned out to be an interesting edge case. Waymos are currently dropping off and picking up passengers in a bike lane which is not legal (because it is dangerous) however many ride share drivers also do this. As somebody who is commonly a biker / pedestrian I am excited that AVs will likely make many things safer for that class of user. That being said, I do worry about how we encode these "social und…

In SF it's legal for taxies to do pickups/drop-offs in bike lanes

I haven't seen any evidence Waymo does it anywhere illegal "just because rideshares do"

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#146

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mlyle wrote: post #111
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> She's not going to drive again She gets her license back. That's wild. > This is something that humans suck at Not usually with fatal consequences. These were preventable deaths. Not only that, the driver was being incredibly reckless, apparently driving 70 mph in a residential area. > You shouldn't punish her for other people failing to take action You're punishing her for being criminally reckless. You're creatin…

> She gets her license back. That's wild. In 3 years, at age 83, if she wanted to... she could try and take the driving test again and become licensed. This is just not going to happen :P In the end, the court can only prohibit her from driving while she is on probation. Would it be great if this time she could be banned forever? Sure. But there's reasons why we don't just let judges make up arbitrary penalties and p…

> she could try and take the driving test again and become licensed. This is just not going to happen

Why? More importantly, why is it on the table?

> the court can only prohibit her from driving while she is on probation

This seems incorrect. Lau was placed on probation for 2 years and had her license revoked for 3 [1].

> Would it be great if this time she could be banned forever? Sure. But there's reasons why we don't just let judges make up arbitrary penalties and permanent restrictions on their own

Straw man. Harsh and arbitrary are mostly orthogonal.

If you kill someone from behind the wheel, and you are at fault, the default punishment should be long-term license revocation and jail time. In almost no case do I see a reason for removing the requirement to spend time in prison altogether.

> Humans don't misestimate their remaining ability with fatal consequences?

Humans get taken off the roads and otherwise criminally incapacitated.

> do not think that the behavior of 80 year old people will be meaningfully changed by the degree of punishment applied here. This is a person that has lost a significant degree of capacity

I do. If the headline were she got years in jail, I'd bet at least a few families would weigh the cost of confronting a relative against the risk that they have to see them behind bars.

[1] https://sfstandard.com/2026/03/20/mary-lau-sentenced-probati...

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#147

Post by retired »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #141
retired wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In countries like The Netherlands it is impossible to drive around uninsured. So that is probably why the number is so low.

> it is impossible to drive around uninsured How?

Because fines are automatic. If you register a vehicle to your name and don't insure it within 28 days you get a €500 fine. The government can fine you up to three times a year for a total of €1500. And that is if you actually pay the fines. If you do not pay the fines and let the fees stack up, you are looking at around €4500 per year.

And if you are caught driving uninsured that is a €700 fine on top of all that. With many police cars now having ANPR systems it just isn't possible to drive around uninsured without receiving fines that cost way more than just getting insurance.

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#148

Post by aziaziazi »

Avicebron wrote: post #121
aziaziazi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are a large group of people dependent on their driver's license Are there "no licence cars" in Belgium and the US ? Basically a moped motor and a seat inside a box. 45kmh and no highway, but a bit more confortable and fast than a ebike for rural environment.

Not really, the cross section of people who lose their license/insurance and those that could use something like an ebike reliably for their commute is practically zilch. The US is really big and a lot of people have rural 30+ minute commutes where it snows ~6 months out of the year.

Oh I was’t clear: I’m not talking about an ebike but a very small and underpowered car like this one https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35210572

There’re somewhat popular here for those that doesn’t have a licence and offer some of the advantage but are less dangerous to others.

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#149

Post by Aurornis »

wongarsu wrote: post #20
callc wrote: post #7

I am, in general, hoping AV will reduce road deaths in the future. The last hurdle is regulatory. We can’t let AV manufacturers use “there’s no driver” as a way to escape responsibility, externalizing the harms AC cause onto society. The question is how to achieve fairness. If a human driver commits vehicular manslaughter, they get the book. What about AV? $10 million? Executives go to jail? What if $10 million fine…

In the US, 11 deaths per billion miles driven (or about 47k per year) is currently seen as an OK cost. More than twice as much per mile as places like Sweden and Switzerland, and still substantially more than places like Canada, Australia or Germany (all three in the 6-8 deaths per billion miles range). So it's not like there isn't room to improve. The effort to do so just isn't seen as worth the cost at the societal…

> So it's not like there isn't room to improve. The effort to do so just isn't seen as worth the cost at the societal or government level

That effort being what, exactly?

Road fatalities per mile driven don’t translate cleanly from country to country because the type of roads and even types of deaths (single vehicle, multi vehicle) are different.

We could set the speed limit at 25mph everywhere and force all vehicles to not exceed that limit and that would make the number go down, but the cost would be extreme for everyone.

So what, exactly, are the solutions you are proposing?

Re: California to begin ticketing driverless cars that violate traffic laws

#150

Post by JumpCrisscross »

retired wrote: post #147
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is impossible to drive around uninsured How?

Because fines are automatic. If you register a vehicle to your name and don't insure it within 28 days you get a €500 fine. The government can fine you up to three times a year for a total of €1500. And that is if you actually pay the fines. If you do not pay the fines and let the fees stack up, you are looking at around €4500 per year. And if you are caught driving uninsured that is a €700 fine on top of all that. W…

> If you register a vehicle to your name and don't insure it within 28 days you get a €500 fine

Oh, this is actually a really good idea. Wild we don't link those systems.

Post reply on HN