Live data from Hacker News

Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

fastcompany.com

901–910 of 954 posts

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not my experience coming from a country with compulsory voting, and having lived in a country without. People in the country without were generally more ignorant of their own politics, and the few people I met who understood what was going on were hesitant to vote. Compulsory voting, and in particular compulsory preferential voting also has a highly centralising effect, which adds to long term stability.

> Absolutely not my experience coming from a country with compulsory voting, and having lived in a country without. People in the country without were generally more ignorant of their own politics, and the few people I met who understood what was going on were hesitant to vote. All of this is an anecdote. It isn't proof of anything. I also think that the people that you think are more informed actually weren't more i…

You're very wrong about the people that I consider more informed just having aligned political interests. The vast majority of them were significantly to the right of myself.

Centralisation is a useful property since the median opinion is closer to the centre. First past the post adds variance that isn't reflective of the average voters opinion, since votes go to the mode party. Under preferential voting, votes flow to the median party.

Because of this effect, you also get a broader range of parties representing the views of a wider cohort of voters. In my local electorate, for example, there are over 7 parties vying for our seat, ranging from an agrarian socialist party, to far right sovereign citizens. I'm not aware of any country without preferential voting with this type of range.

The fact that people like you are disengaged with politics is kind of why I prefer compulsory voting. In countries without compulsory voting, opinions like yours don't get reflected in party policy. Here (apart from the stance against compulsory voting, which is wildly unpopular, and only held by very fringe parties), the opinions of people less likely to vote in other countries are broadly reflected in parliament.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#902
There's a governor on my ebike that prevents the battery from pushing the bike faster than a set speed. I can pedal it faster than that sometimes, but that is a limiting factor. I'm not opposed to such governors in automobiles. If you can Flintstone it faster, go for it.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#903

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Absolutely not my experience coming from a country with compulsory voting, and having lived in a country without. People in the country without were generally more ignorant of their own politics, and the few people I met who understood what was going on were hesitant to vote. All of this is an anecdote. It isn't proof of anything. I also think that the people that you think are more informed actually weren't more i…

You're very wrong about the people that I consider more informed just having aligned political interests. The vast majority of them were significantly to the right of myself. Centralisation is a useful property since the median opinion is closer to the centre. First past the post adds variance that isn't reflective of the average voters opinion, since votes go to the mode party. Under preferential voting, votes flow…

> You're very wrong about the people that I consider more informed just having aligned political interests. The vast majority of them were significantly to the right of myself.

If you say so (I have no way to verify this). Generally however it is the case that people behave the way I describe. This is because most people analyse things through a them/us filter, not based on the facts.

> Centralisation is a useful property since the median opinion is closer to the centre. First past the post adds variance that isn't reflective of the average voters opinion, since votes go to the mode party. Under preferential voting, votes flow to the median party.

There is no "median" opinion, like the concept of the "average person" they don't exist, so how can they be represented?

Also the concept of "centre" is assuming that "right" vs "left" politics is valid model. Since the right and left have literally changed important policy positions (when convenient) in the last 20-30 years, I realised the descriptors don't actually really mean anything. The right vs left is just a way of labelling people as part of the alternative faction, so people can easily dismiss their opinion.

Most people think I am part of the right. I realised I wasn't when I noticed I shared a number of views with a Revolutionary Black communist in the USA than the Conservative party of the UK (I am English).

> Because of this effect, you also get a broader range of parties representing the views of a wider cohort of voters. In my local electorate, for example, there are over 7 parties vying for our seat, ranging from an agrarian socialist party, to far right sovereign citizens. I'm not aware of any country without preferential voting with this type of range.

This assumes that this is all a good thing. It also assumes that those elected represent the interests of their voters (they don't BTW, that is another rabbit hole).

Have you asked yourself why should everyone be represented? I do not ask my mechanic their opinion about medicine, I do not ask my doctor his opinion about car repair.

So why is it a good thing that someone's views are represented when they will have at best a very surface level understanding of a particular speciality / issue / topic? It isn't a good idea.

> The fact that people like you are disengaged with politics is kind of why I prefer compulsory voting.

So you want to force me to participate when I don't want to? I don't want to participate at all. Why do you think that is okay at all? Because you think it gives better representation. Whether something is "better" is very subjective. That is bullshit as far as I am concerned.

> In countries without compulsory voting, opinions like yours don't get reflected in party policy. Here (apart from the stance against compulsory voting, which is wildly unpopular, and only held by very fringe parties), the opinions of people less likely to vote in other countries are broadly reflected in parliament.

You don't understand my political opinions at all. No party policy would/could or would I want them to reflected in party policy. I told you I don't want to participate in it at all. I don't want it to exist. So how it could it represent me? It can't.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#905
post #803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Trying to guard against tyranny by increasing private gun ownership is dumb Worked once

Great. Even accepting your case (I assume you mean the US revolutionary war, which, for the record, I don't think is that great of an example to begin with), you provide a n=1 in support of your argument. On the other hand, there are literally dozens of examples of civil society organizations organizations and protest movements successfully countering government overreach or military coup d'etats with peaceful means…

Peaceful protests, even if they’re successful, have nothing to do with the discussion of “Trying to guard against tyranny by increasing private gun ownership is dumb“

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait -- I have to pay for a breathalizer in my new vehicle because other people can't follow the law? That's BS. I don't drink alcohol and I hate everything about this.

When it comes to motor vehicles we're CONSTANTLY paying for other people's mistakes. The unfortunate reality is that driving is the number 1 cause of death for most demographics. We cannot treat it like we treat other things, simply due to the extreme risk. That means we have to prevent accidents any way we can and put safety nets where we can. Yes, it sucks that now you're going to have to pay marginally more for yo…

Tbf the reason we treat autos risk like this is less about the extreme risk of autos and more about politics and culture.

There 1001 ways we could ensure that most of the cost and externalities of driving are not foisted on others, but we don’t do that because so many people drive and most vote, if they think getting fewer auto deaths means they’ll have to pay $0.01 for parking or that they might be 1% more likely to be caught when they speed, they reject it.

So instead we socialize it, pushing costs, inconveniences, injuries and death on others.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#907
post #875

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have to pay for a breathalizer in my new vehicle because other people can't follow the law? That's BS. Not to be too pedantic, but this is the nature of most taxes and regulation. It's part of living in a society.

Off-the-grid homesteading is looking more and more appealing every year.

Fill your boots, though tbc, cars aren’t really an off the grid type of device, unless your homestead has an oil well and a refinery :)

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#908

Repeat offenders should not be allowed to drive. In the UK we have 12 points, and lose them for various offences. You get a fine, usually with the alternative of a course the first time. Speed again within 12 months and you get a fine and a minimum of three points (more if you are well above the limit). Speed again within four years and you will lose more points, and AFAIK pretty much guaranteed to be more than the m…

This is similar to the system some states have. The USA is a hodge podge of car laws and policies

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#909

Cities can replace smooth asphalt with rough brick and cobblestone, and replace traffic lights with traffic circles / roundabouts. If they really want to force cars to slow down, they could, in a way that doesn't take anyone's rights away and doesn't require any vehicle manufacturer to play ball. Freedom isn't free. It's always cheaper to take away people's freedom instead of doing the hard work of building infrastru…

This the wrong way. It will destroy suspensions at 5-10x the regular rate and not everyone can afford a new suspension every 5 years.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#910

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uninsured/underinsured motorist insurance are literally line items on my car insurance bill.

Those were on my late wife's bill too. After she got hit, ultimately leading to her death in time, by an uninsured guy we had to get a lawyer and fight Eire Insurance for three years for them to honor that line on the bill.

I'm so sorry for your loss. It always crushes me to hear of yet another family torn apart due to our car dependence. Thank you for sharing your story.
Post reply on HN