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

241–250 of 401 posts

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#241

Post by asyx »

slau wrote: post #208
causalmodels wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Well, yes, but not really. The recommended speed limit is still 130 km/h. However going past the recommended speed limit is not illegal. If you get into an accident while going faster than 130km/h which could have been prevented by going the advised speed limit, you may be considered more liable by the courts. I’ve heard that there may be cases where your insurance might not cover you, but I’ve never found proof of t…

That wording is not correct. Recommended speed is a mechanism that is employed in many countries (in the Netherlands you see it on highway exits). The only rules that apply on a highway without signs is a recommended speed of 130 km/h with all the legal consequences this entails (e.g. if you have an accident you are at least partially at fault because the traffic situation obviously didn't allow you to drive as fast as you did) but speeding is not decriminalized as THC products are decriminalized in the Netherlands. There just is no speed limit. Period.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#242

Post by kkfx »

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…

In mere existence terms... It exists, my cars almost detect correctly all speed limits it see around, almost because sometimes it detect wrong one or for a wrong road tract (like a temporary limit due to some road works, kept after that just because there is a missing end sign), but in mandatory (present and on by default) means that we will get wrong actions, as per phantom breaks (I got three in three last days, for instance, in one case exaggerated and too hard, the other two for not valid reasons though not hard).

That's aside the mere fact we should been able to ignore speed limits under specific circumstances that's are typically emergencies so we do not have time to dig in the vehicle tablet menu to deactivate some ADAS...

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#243

Post by xnx »

jvanderbot wrote: post #78
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally everything causes death. The question is: will this prevent more deaths from speeding than it causes from mistaken slowdowns?

I wonder how long we can ignore the natural human tendancy to need blame / attribution. The way I think about it is: If, in the limiting case, we replace all driver mistakes with software mistakes, and there's 1/2 as many deaths from these mistakes, but they are uniformly distributed, I am honestly not sure how acceptable this would be to the public. It's like sacrificing people randomly to disallow dangerous drivers…

As a safe driver, I am comfortable with this tradeoff. I estimate the chance of me getting killed/maimed by some other speeding/dangerous driver is much greater than getting killed/maimed by a software error.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#244

Post by kerkeslager »

novagameco wrote: post #188
stavros wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very different to watch 1% of drivers, 1% of the time, and to watch 100% of drivers, 100% of the time. There's no room for change if law enforcement is absolute. Imagine if gay people could never sex, because a microchip zapped their brain whenever they got a sexual thought about a member of the same sex. Homosexuality would still be illegal.

Putting a microchip in people's brains is a completely different thing than putting a microchip in people's cars. People have a right to bodily autonomy; they don't have a right to drive a car. The first would violate human rights on principle alone, the second has no implication on human rights

I think that very much depends on what the chip in the car does. If it effectively broadcasts your movements to the government, I very much think that does have human rights implications (on the right to privacy).

However, if the chip just limits your car's speed, I have trouble imagining what rights that would violate. Your right to speed? C'mon.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#245

Post by bluefirebrand »

zehaeva wrote: post #207
bluefirebrand wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stopping in traffic is almost never the safest option If you are approaching and have room but someone is closing the gap, it may indeed be safer to speed up so you can take the spot before it closes and you are forced to stop Granted, drivers should not be taking away the room you need to merge, but if everyone on the road were good drivers then we might not be seeking such nannying tech built into our cars to force…

If all vehicles are limited in the same way I am uncertain how this could even happen. If the computer enforced max speed is 120km, and I'm going 120km, and the vehicle coming up is also going 120km, they can't overtake you, they can't close the gap. Maybe, if the vehicle ahead of both of you is going much slower than either of you then yeah, they could close the gap. But even in that situation you could speed up to…

> If all vehicles are limited in the same way I am uncertain how this could even happen

This won't happen unless it becomes illegal to drive un-limited vehicles entirely though

People will drive older un-limited vehicles, or import un-limited cars from elsewhere, or buy limited cars and jailbreak them...

You're starting with a flawed premise and then concluding what you prefer

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#246

Post by xnx »

akira2501 wrote: post #195
masterj wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is the category of "deaths from speeding" large enough to justify any action whatsoever? Cars kill 40k+ people in the US each year, and speed (really momentum) is a large factor in the lethality of crashes. > Why does the Autobahn still not have speed limits on large parts of the road and why does this not cause massive problems? It's designed for these speeds. Most speeding issues do not occur on highways, but on…

> Cars kill 40k+ people in the US each year Not quite. 8k of those are motorcycles. 8k are pedestrians. Half of those are drivers who had drugs or alcohol in their system. One quarter are male drivers under 25. Most fatalities happen at night. > and speed (really momentum) is a large factor in the lethality of crashes. Not quite. It's mostly lack of seatbelt usage. > Most speeding issues do not occur on highways, but…

I love this extra detail. I would still think a car going slower is going to improve outcomes of drunk, distract, high, and un-belted drivers.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#247

Post by jvanderbot »

xnx wrote: post #243
jvanderbot wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how long we can ignore the natural human tendancy to need blame / attribution. The way I think about it is: If, in the limiting case, we replace all driver mistakes with software mistakes, and there's 1/2 as many deaths from these mistakes, but they are uniformly distributed, I am honestly not sure how acceptable this would be to the public. It's like sacrificing people randomly to disallow dangerous drivers…

As a safe driver, I am comfortable with this tradeoff. I estimate the chance of me getting killed/maimed by some other speeding/dangerous driver is much greater than getting killed/maimed by a software error.

OK, makes sense if you believe the chances are much different. I'm wondering at what point do we breakeven? 1/2 the chance? 1/4 the chance? 90% the chance?

In fact, as a (ostensibly) safe driver, your odds of dying from software-related random choice might even be higher than from dangerous driving today. How many lives would you be willing to save to take on that extra risk to yourself?

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#248

Post by beaeglebeachedd »

leephillips wrote: post #91
EricE wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Government regulation is constantly decreased. Weed is now legal in most US states for recreational use (I think; at any rate, many of them). The recent US Supreme Court Chevron decision will, for better or worse, probably lead to significant deregulation.

Weed is illegal everywhere in the US by federal law and defacto illegal by state law in most 'legal' states if you are anything other than a homeless bum, as driving a car with metabolites or owning a gun (or just living in same house) as a user are both crimes.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#249

Post by gumby »

kodt wrote: post #70
VyseofArcadia wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that the general case is hard to solve. I think you could at least make a case for solving a simpler problem. What's the highest legal speed limit in the country in which the car was sold? Set a global speed limit to that.

This could make it impossible or dangerous to pass in many situations where it may be necessary to temporarily exceed the speed limit.

The EU system clearly takes this into account, beginning with an alarm and only later reducing engine power. Unless you're overtaking a dozen vehicles you're probably OK.

OK, it won't help you escape the bad guys chasing you but they'll probably have the limiter too.

Re: Speed limiters now mandatory in all new EU cars

#250

Post by ExoticPearTree »

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 did a drive test about two weeks or so ago with two new cars, 2023 models. They beeped every time the speed was about, I think, more than 10kph more than the TSR system read. At first I had no idea why the car was beeping for no reason.

So I had to find a place to stop, go into car settings - which annoyingly enough are disabled while the car is not in Park, and disable features until I found the TSR option, disabled it, car stopped beeping.

I have a couple of issues with this: - my current car has TSR and I use it to remember what the speed limit was on a road segment. Quite handy if you miss the speed limit change sign. As a workaround I could use Waze/Google Maps with CarPlay to tell me what the speed limit is, but it is an extra hoop I have to jump through - beeping is annoying, but it only beeps for a second or two, so I guess with time you just tune it out - reducing the speed to match the posted speed limit is beyond madness. Most roads haven't had signs changed in decades when cars would brake in a longer distance, no ABS or any other electronic assistance systems were available. Any car from the past 20 years or so can drive safely at greater speeds and stop in a very short distance. - not all signs are properly recognized, like no overtake zones and so on. Not to mention cases where the overtake zone finishes there are no signs indicating that. Same goes for lane keeping assist where temporary markings make the car wobble because it confuses the system and thinks you're driving between the lanes.

Post reply on HN