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

Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

autoweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 401 posts

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#211

Post by bigfudge »

nradov wrote: post #204
bigfudge wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like a motoring journalist. Honestly, if you’re exceeding the speed limit to pass you’re unlikely to be gaining much anyway. 99% of the time people should just chill out and accept that driving a car already comes with so many unpaid externalities that not killing other people with your tonne of steel is a reasonable compromise. Speed is the major contributor to mortality and injury on the roads (and in dev…

What a ridiculous comment. Have you ever been stuck behind a slow vehicle? It seems like some of the idealists and scolds here have never driven in the real world.

I’ve been a driver for 30 years.

If stuck behind an actually slow vehicle it’s possible to overtake. If stuck behind someone close to the speed limit it’s not. If someone killed my family while speeding and overtaking I would be angry and ask them why their freedom to speed was more important than their freedom from injury and death. Speed is the major contributor to injury on roads. Arguing for more speed during the riskiest maneuvers we make doesn’t sound like a smart move to me.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#212

Post by jhgvh »

EricE wrote: post #64
scoot wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you didn't. The most proactive method is "a speed control function in which the speed of the vehicle will be gradually reduced", and "the system can be smoothly overridden by the driver by pressing the accelerator pedal a little bit deeper", so your hyperbolic reaction is overwrought.

Is it though? When has government regulation ever decreased? Give them an inch...

Yes, it’s overwrought.

The vast majority of these restrictions are not slippery slopes. In fact, slippery slope arguments are themselves a category of logical fallacy.

I understand that many people are driven by fear and emotions, but you should get ahold of yourself and stop supporting irrational hysteria.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#213

Post by slau »

gambiting wrote: post #88
causalmodels wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the autobahn have unrestricted sections with no speed limit?

It does. And people drive between countries all the time in Europe, I personally drive through Germany few times a year and I'd hate it if my car had a speed limit purely because I bought it outside of Germany. But perhaps that's somewhat of an edge case that would work with a simple GPS geofence.

My car instantly recognises that I’m in Germany and knows what speed I used in the unrestricted sections, and automatically switches back to that.

When I’m in Belgium it knows the speed on the highway is 120 km/h. In France or Denmark 130 km/h. In Germany in an unrestricted section? Whatever I last set it to.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#214

Post by nasmorn »

bsimpson wrote: post #111
nasmorn wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used the ACC with automatic speed recognition for about two months but it did too many stupid brakings. I think using GPS to limit to the highest possible speed for highway/roads/city would be fine. But as long as the car can decide that on this highway it really thinks the 40 sign is for the main lane and not the off ramp, I would rather not have it

There are many places where roads are too close together for GPS to be reliable (for instance, frontage roads or spaghetti bowl interchanges). If you're driving adjacent to or above/below a slower road, the technology needs to know that you're entitled to drive at the faster speed.

I guess you are right it is the same problem really. Where I live you could at least limit it to 80km/h in the city limits since there is no higher limit anywhere. But more granular limits might be hard

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#215

Post by zehaeva »

userulluipeste wrote: post #206
zehaeva wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if every car is following the speed limit, that is going as fast as they are allowed, why would any one person be passing someone else?

Well, you see, it's for the cases where not every car is going as fast as they are allowed.

If they're going so much slower than the limit that it's unsafe, wouldn't it be easy to pass at the regulated limit?

If they're going just a _little_ bit slower than the limit, why pass them? Are you telling me that 3kmph, or even 10kmph, slower than the limit is slow enough to make an appreciable difference to your everyday driving?

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#216

Post by newaccount74 »

gambiting wrote: post #152
bigfudge wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like a motoring journalist. Honestly, if you’re exceeding the speed limit to pass you’re unlikely to be gaining much anyway. 99% of the time people should just chill out and accept that driving a car already comes with so many unpaid externalities that not killing other people with your tonne of steel is a reasonable compromise. Speed is the major contributor to mortality and injury on the roads (and in dev…

>>Also, can some describe in detail a scenario where accelerating makes things safer than simply slowing down Mostly in a situation where you've already messed up. Like you're in a middle of an overtake and suddenly you realize you're not going to make it before the incoming car, speeding up to close the gap can save your life in a way that slamming the brakes and just getting hit head-on wouldn't. And yes, you shoul…

Even in that situation, hitting the brakes and aborting the overtake maneuver is the safer option. With ABS ubiquitous, even hard braking should leave your car maneuverable.

If you push on the accelerator, you are just increasing the risk, as you'll hit the car at a much higher speed. The crash is going to be 10x worse.

A speed limit would safe a lot of lives, but no-one will implement it because people like to speed.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#218

Post by slau »

gambiting wrote: post #9

This is one example of legislation that mandates fantasy tech that doesn't exist. You'd think that something as simple as speed limiter should be very easy to implement, and it couldn't be further from the truth - watch any review of a car with this tech and every reviewer will complain that it's not the presence of the system that's the problem, it's the fact that it constantly gets the speed limit wrong. Either rea…

I actually quite like it. There’s obviously a few quirks, and it works heaps and bounds better when you’re driving in the country where the system was designed (Germany vs Denmark in my case).

My main issue is when speed limits are reduced but for some reason the car is not getting the update. Copenhagen reduced a huge number of big arteries from 60 km/h to 50 km/h, but over two years later, my car still applies the old value.

I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t even be able to contest this in court.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#219

Post by ghaff »

shortrounddev2 wrote: post #4
ghaff wrote: post #2

A number of years back I had a rental car (in Arizona possibly) that had a speed limiter that was at the speed limit--or just above--as I recall and it was incredibly annoying.

What was annoying about it?

Basically it kept cutting out right around the speed limit (may have been 5mph over) on the highway. It wasn't "smart" just an absolute limit. (I think wherever I was had a relatively high speed limit for the time--maybe 70--so it was probably some standard governor setting which was sort of unreasonable for where I was, but a long time ago.)

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#220

Post by its_ethan »

novagameco wrote: post #175
umvi wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One possible future includes one or more of: - AI guns that won't shoot at other people, only authorized in-season animals. - AI keyboards that won't let you type "hate speech" - AI browsers that only let you visit approved, legal sites. - AI smartphones that contact the police if you are breaking curfew, trespassing, recording unauthorized (copyrighted) public or audio, etc.

> - AI guns that won't shoot at other people, only authorized in-season animals. That sounds like a legitimately good idea, why would you need a gun that shoots people

> why would you need a gun that shoots people

Resisting the urge to be snarky, self defense is a legitimate answer. You may not live somewhere where it's common (or you may not frequently feel unsafe) but wanting the ability to have a weapon to defend yourself (or more commonly to show that you have the ability to defend yourself) from any assailant is a very real thing for people both in the US and around the world.

There are plenty of women with restraining orders against men who would do them harm who would very much suffer consequences, and be made much more afraid for their safety, if it weren't for "guns that shoot people".

Post reply on HN