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

New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

carexpert.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 96 posts

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#61

Post by pawelduda »

I have Toyota that does it and the first thing I do after starting the engine is to turn it off. It will turn itself on always, can't be changed. This feature is not only annoying and out of touch with reality, but also has a bug that in the very worst case could cause an accident.

It beeps whenever the speed limit changes. If at the time you are connected via Android Auto with Google maps, it will instantly disconnect without any warning nor error. 90% of time. Imagine navigating through a dense area like a city you don't know, suddenly you lose GPS, and to get it back you have to go all the way into connections menu and wait for reconnect. Worst that happened to me were missed turns or going slightly past no entry sign. Nice "safety" feature. Disabled it and never had a disconnect since. Every now and then I start to drive with it and have to stop to turn it off (not disableable while you drive). Considering calling dealership to ask if they can turn it off permanently for me - but probably all I'll hear will be "it's mandated by law, can't do".

It is a bug in Toyota software. I found out because there are more people posting about it online.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#62

Post by timbit42 »

tazu wrote: post #10

One place this would definitely be dangerous is in my city in the US. There's an interstate highway with a posted limit of 55mph, but everyone does 70mph+ (there is no police enforcement, because it's too dangerous---pulling people over here causes more accidents due to rubbernecking and traffic). If you were to actually go the speed limit, you'd be constantly passed (on both sides) by aggressive drivers and cause un…

Where I live, the police won't pull you over for speeding if everyone is doing that speed because it wouldn't be safe for you to drive the posted speed limit as it would cause accidents.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#64

Post by dangus »

toast0 wrote: post #26
dangus wrote: post #3

From the article: "To put it simply, the system is dangerous." And then it proceeds to spend zero time at all describing exactly what is dangerous about it. Seriously, the article doesn't even hypothesize about what makes this dangerous, it just says that it's bad. The car I drove about 10 years ago had trouble exceeding the speed limit at times because it was a diesel! It was never dangerous. Trucks including rental…

I think there's a fundamental issue here that the posted speed limit is often not the same thing as a reasonable maximum speed that's appropriate for conditions. Speed limits are set for all sorts of reasons that don't often match up with safety, and even then, they're usually set for normal conditions; when you have great visibility, dry pavement, and low traffic, it's often not unsafe to exceed the posted limit; ju…

I'm confused at your argument. You're talking about inclement conditions where you're supposed to be driving below the speed limit anyway.

If everyone is at or below the speed limit, there is no situation where the reasonable maximum that exceeds the speed limit.

Perhaps you could safely drive faster, but nobody actually has to drive faster. And when you're driving slower your stopping distance is less, your chance of death in an accident is less. It's basic physics and accident statistics.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#65

Post by dangus »

falcolas wrote: post #29
dangus wrote: post #3

From the article: "To put it simply, the system is dangerous." And then it proceeds to spend zero time at all describing exactly what is dangerous about it. Seriously, the article doesn't even hypothesize about what makes this dangerous, it just says that it's bad. The car I drove about 10 years ago had trouble exceeding the speed limit at times because it was a diesel! It was never dangerous. Trucks including rental…

If you are accelerating, particularly in an EV, and your car starts screwing with your controls while pelting you with a high decibal alarm you used to only hear in an imminent collision, your chances of losing control are going to skyrocket. It happens all the time with inexperienced drivers and high performance vehicles, and consumer EVs are also high performance vehicles. Hyundai - one of the manufacturers mention…

I'm confused at this argument. It sounds like the driver has already lost control? Or is this just making an excuse for assholes who accelerate too fast? Or making excuses for cars that are sold as dangerous toys instead of transportation devices?

Like, yeah, maybe there should be a 0-60 limit imposed on manufacturers, too. I would think that this would be complimentary to my argument.

I think it's also potentially strange to think that a chime is going to cause people to dramatically lose control of their vehicle in this imagined scenario.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#66

Post by tazu »

kazinator wrote: post #46
tazu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I frequently pass cars that have signs of an impaired driver. Usually the driver is texting, but the signs are usually failure to maintain lane, frequent (unnecessary) brake tapping, and sporadic acceleration. Something that impedes my ability to pass unsafe drivers is unsafe.

An unsafe driver ahead of you is safer than one behind you. (If you're not keeping enough of a distance, then the unsafe driver is you.)

Whenever I keep safe distance, I'll have cars close behind me and other cars filling in the gap I created. Then my problem is the same: an unsafe driver ahead of me who could easily cause an accident, and not enough time to react.

It's much better to pass and forget.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#67

Post by kazinator »

tazu wrote: post #66
kazinator wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An unsafe driver ahead of you is safer than one behind you. (If you're not keeping enough of a distance, then the unsafe driver is you.)

Whenever I keep safe distance, I'll have cars close behind me and other cars filling in the gap I created. Then my problem is the same: an unsafe driver ahead of me who could easily cause an accident, and not enough time to react. It's much better to pass and forget.

If someone's being dangerously erratic, it may be best to just turn and take a different route.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#69

Post by amy-petrik-214 »

taeric wrote: post #52
falcolas wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And if you're pulled over for speeding way up, I have never heard of a traffic cop who will ticket you. Some online study aids for passing start with "increase your speed so you may finish the pass quickly" and end with "maintain a safe passing speed until you have created sufficient distance to resume a safe cruising speed." Others recommend a full 10mph speed difference to keep the passing time short.

I've known people to get a ticket in this exact scenario. Speeding is not allowed just to pass and will often times get you hit with a reckless driving charge, as well. Especially so if you go 10+ over the limit. Now, if you mean someone that went less than 5 over the limit, I'm back in agreement with you. But, that is within the realm of speed that probably won't get you pulled over even when not passing?

I think the whole thing is quite subjective and certainly in part the subjection would depend on that particular officer's mood on that particular time on that particular day at that particular place.

The subjective assessment would be along the lines of differentiating between "driver slowly and casually accelerated to 10 mph over the limit, passed the car with a wide berth, and merged back with a large buffer" versus "driver suddenly accelerated from 10 mph below the speed limit to 3 above, spitefully passed closely to another car before dangerously cutting 2 feet in front of them"

I think most officers have been driving long enough to tell if someone is driving like a dick or cruising at 10 mph over and being chill. The latter will still get you a ticket, sure, but the likelihood of getting excoriated by them is less than say, 5 mph over the limit and you're tailgating and cutting people off. Some of those things maybe the cop can't legally write you up for, but the cop will see, can tell, and will make sure that you'll get written up for some thing or another. And hey that's a good thing, nobody likes a douchey driver.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#70

Post by toast0 »

dangus wrote: post #64
toast0 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a fundamental issue here that the posted speed limit is often not the same thing as a reasonable maximum speed that's appropriate for conditions. Speed limits are set for all sorts of reasons that don't often match up with safety, and even then, they're usually set for normal conditions; when you have great visibility, dry pavement, and low traffic, it's often not unsafe to exceed the posted limit; ju…

I'm confused at your argument. You're talking about inclement conditions where you're supposed to be driving below the speed limit anyway. If everyone is at or below the speed limit, there is no situation where the reasonable maximum that exceeds the speed limit. Perhaps you could safely drive faster, but nobody actually has to drive faster. And when you're driving slower your stopping distance is less, your chance o…

> And when you're driving slower your stopping distance is less, your chance of death in an accident is less. It's basic physics and accident statistics.

The faster we travel, the less time we spend traveling. The posted limit is not necessarily a reasonable maximum speed; that's my point in both directions.

Post reply on HN