Live data from Hacker News

Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

mercurynews.com

71–80 of 218 posts

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safety and posted speed limits are often not super compatible; the safest thing, in most road conditions, is to be driving relatively close to the speed of the surrounding traffic, even if that means exceeding the posted speed limit. (in other words, speed itself is not dangerous except in certain situations -- like sharp curves or wet/snowy/icy roads -- speed differential is dangerous)

You're basically saying that everyone should defect because everyone else does. Which may well be true for a single human driver, but is probably not how autonomous cars as a whole should be programmed. Nor does it support the claim that "speed itself is not dangerous". If everyone were driving slower, everyone would be safer (which we may actually be able to achieve once a sufficient number of law-abiding robot cars…

You're basically saying that everyone should defect because everyone else does.

So, there are three speeds we need to be concerned with here:

1. Design speed -- this is the speed anticipated and planned for by the engineers who designed the road. It's visible in features like curves, merging areas and so on.

2. Operating speed -- this is the actual speed of traffic on the road once built, and typically is measured as the 85th percentile of observed traffic (i.e., the speed such that 85% of traffic travels at or below that speed).

3. Speed limit -- this is the posted maximum above which vehicles can be stopped and ticketed by an enforcement officer.

In real-world scenarios both the design speed and the operating speed are often higher than the speed limit, because speed limits are often more strongly influenced -- and always downward, when they are influenced in this way -- by factors other than safety (i.e., politics and revenue).

Which is a problem. Good road design anticipates roughly what the operating speed will be, and attempts to match that in the design. Setting a limit which differs significantly from the operating and design speeds is only good for politics ("we're making you safer by slowing down the traffic") and revenue (more tickets issued for speeding); it has no relation to actually-safer roads.

And in general, yes, speed differential is more commonly a danger than simple raw speed; the intuitive explanation is that every event of one vehicle passing another creates an opportunity for a collision, and moving at a speed significantly different from all other traffic (regardless of whether faster or slower) increases the number of passing events which necessarily increases the chance of a collision.

Thus, regardless of posted limits, it is safer to match your speed to that of surrounding traffic. This is not a case of "everyone should defect because everyone else does". It's a case of "the people who posted the speed limit defected, and you shouldn't follow their example".

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safety and posted speed limits are often not super compatible; the safest thing, in most road conditions, is to be driving relatively close to the speed of the surrounding traffic, even if that means exceeding the posted speed limit. (in other words, speed itself is not dangerous except in certain situations -- like sharp curves or wet/snowy/icy roads -- speed differential is dangerous)

You meant the safest thing for people in cars. This is not the safest thing for pedestrians, thousands of whom die from being hit by cars in the USA every year.

The safest thing for pedestrians would be to ban all motorized vehicles, then ban all other vehicles, then ban pedestrians from venturing out of their homes on foot.

Good road design accommodates pedestrians when pedestrians will be present (i.e., controlled-access freeways are designed with the assumption that pedestrians will not be present), but speed limits have very little to do with pedestrian safety.

Pedestrian safety is improved by design features of the road, and generally the design is based on the expected 85th-percentile speed of vehicle traffic.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to unfortunate phrasing, "no person" was driving at such slow speed ;)

Google, a subsidiary of Alphabet, was operating the car, no?

Alphabet's Google, as we say, was operating the car. And corporations are people, my friend.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absurd that 24 mph in a 35 zone is considered "too slow". This is nearly equivalent to driving 40 km/h in a 60 km/h zone, and there is not a single traffic court in any Canadian city that would uphold a ticket being served for that difference. How is this even a thing down there? In a 60 km/h zone here, you'd have to be going 25 km/h to even warrant being pulled over at all (ie: doing 15 mph in 37 mph zone). If…

In California, if you aren't driving 5 mph over the speed limit, the car behind you is going to tailgate the hell out of you. It's ridiculous, I know.

I'd like to see police start giving tickets for tailgating instead of speeding. Speeding alone is rarely very dangerous, especially on roads with few other cars.

On the other hand, tailgating is always extremely dangerous, even when the speeds involved are relatively low.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're basically saying that everyone should defect because everyone else does. Which may well be true for a single human driver, but is probably not how autonomous cars as a whole should be programmed. Nor does it support the claim that "speed itself is not dangerous". If everyone were driving slower, everyone would be safer (which we may actually be able to achieve once a sufficient number of law-abiding robot cars…

Exactly. If everyone followed the traffic rules instead of considering themselves smarter than traffic engineers, rules could then be adjusted to accomodate for optimal flow and safety. Alas, drivers know better and you can't optimize anything, because people will ignore the rules anyway.

If everyone followed the traffic rules instead of considering themselves smarter than traffic engineers

Traffic engineers don't set speed limits. Politicians do. If politicians would stop thinking they're smarter than the engineers, the speed limits would match the design and operating speeds of the roads much more often.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#76
post #40
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in Germany it's even disallowed to drive too slow without a good reason. Although "a good reason" is probably still open to interpretation.

Living in Germany, I never heard about anyone ticketed for this. The only case really covered by this rule is, that one drives extremely slow under good conditions. Otherwise, in many situations "safety" would be a good reason. And in general, you cannot be asked to drive faster than your car can go. With the exception of the Autobahn and a very few similar streets, the Google car would be legal to drive speed-wise,…

I'm guessing it's intended as a liability law, like jaywalking laws are. Nobody will ticket you for jaywalking; instead, it'll just serve as the defense of whoever ended up hitting you. "They just ran out onto the freeway right in front of me!"

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If everyone were driving slower, everyone would be safer But that's always true. All the way down to 10mph speed limits. The job of speed limits is not maximum safety at the cost of everything else. In practice, people can tell the design speed of a road and mostly follow that, no matter what the signs say. Defecting or not doesn't matter very much.

> In practice, people can tell the design speed of a road and mostly follow that, no matter what the signs say. Defecting or not doesn't matter very much. It does, because what people can tell is only the design of the stretch of the road they're at. They have no awareness of how it interacts with rest of the roads in the area. By ignoring the rules they make it significantly harder to optimize traffic flow globally.…

By definition, the design speed of a segment of road comes from taking into account the entire segment. If a segment contains sharp curves, for example, then the entire segment can be designed around that fact.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#78
post #21
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, though once there are enough of them on the road, they could be made to help each other out. In fact, they could make it so that human drivers are at a disadvantage.

Agreed that enough of these self-driving cars on the road would put human drivers at a relative disadvantage if the self-driving cars are able to transmit and share data among themselves regarding dangerous road conditions that require extra precautions (e.g., icy, slick surfaces), accidents, traffic conditions or dangerous human drivers that are putting others at risk.

Alternatively, they could also share their data in an open way and some device in regular cars could pick it up and use it to assist regular drivers.

I think both scenarios are possible. That data is valuable so maybe Google doesn't share it. Sharing it would create quite a bit of goodwill towards their cars so maybe they will. It's an interesting strategic decision. [not sure about data protection laws but maybe they can't share it even between Google cars unless the owners opt in]

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California, if you aren't driving 5 mph over the speed limit, the car behind you is going to tailgate the hell out of you. It's ridiculous, I know.

That is normal here too, and it's more like 7-8 mph. So you can receive a ticket for impeding traffic even if the people you are supposedly obstructing would be exceeding the speed limit? Instead of ticketing the slow guy, set up a sting and ticket every person exceeding the limit by more than 6 mph. This whole thing sounds backwards.

It's a matter of public safety. Holding up a line of cars is likely to result in road rage, or an accident.

It's also very rare for slow drivers to get ticketed.

Re: Google self-driving car pulled over for driving too slowly

#80
post #50
post #10

They didn't link to either of their sources, so I went and found them: Mountain View Police Department blog post: http://mountainviewpoliceblog.com/2015/11/12/inquiring-minds... Google Self-Driving Car Project Google+ post: https://plus.google.com/+SelfDrivingCar/posts/j9ouVZSZnRf

Thanks! That MV police blog post says the traffic officer stopped the car to "educate the operators about impeding traffic per 22400(a) of the California Vehicle Code." That section of the vehicle code says, emphasis added: "No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of…

Is that required by law? FTA '"We've capped the speed of our prototype vehicles at 25 mph for safety reasons," the post explained. "We want them to feel friendly and approachable, rather than zooming scarily through neighborhood streets."'

Sounds like Google's decision to me. Either way, it's not a highway, so that section seems irrelevant. And "in compliance with the law" is quite a broad redirect.

Post reply on HN