3 ms·

I really wouldn't want to program a car that obeys speed limits in 49 states, and in one state "record[s] evidence of conditions which could show that the speed

I really wouldn't want to program a car that obeys speed limits in 49 states, and in one state "record[s] evidence of conditions which could show that the speed was reasonable and prudent given the conditions" From an implementation perspective that sounds like a lot of overhead just to let Californians drive fast.

mikeash 9y ago
Autonomous cars will need to be able to determine a safe and prudent speed in every state. I'm pretty sure every state has laws saying that speeds must be lower that the limit in bad conditions, and even if they don't, the car will have to do this just for basic safety. It shouldn't need any special casing for California.
dragonwriter 9y ago
About a quarter of US jurisdictions follow the same basic rule as California, where exceeding a posted speed limit is prima facie, but rebuttable, evidence of a violation. So it's not a 49/1 rule. And, in any case, 100% of US jurisdictions prohibit driving at a speed above the safe and reasonable speed if that is lower than the posted and/or statutory limit, so you need to be able to determine what is safe for conditions anyway; it's just a minority of states where that is a relevant determination when the results are above the posted limit.
Spivak 9y ago
You have it backwards. Everyone is going to drive fast regardless of the law. Cali is just a state that recognizes this. Writing the law for humans should be celebrated. You can either take that into account or you close your eyes and plug your ears to reality and release a shitty autonomous car.
toast0 9y ago
You may be underestimating the market of Californians who want to drive fast. For a long time, to sell a car in California at all, you had to put a special emissions package together, with was a lot of overhead, but manufacturers still did it, because losing the California market to save overhead doesn't make sense when selling cars.

mikeash 9y ago

Autonomous cars will need to be able to determine a safe and prudent speed in every state. I'm pretty sure every state has laws saying that speeds must be lower that the limit in bad conditions, and even if they don't, the car will have to do this just for basic safety. It shouldn't need any special casing for California.

dragonwriter 9y ago

About a quarter of US jurisdictions follow the same basic rule as California, where exceeding a posted speed limit is prima facie, but rebuttable, evidence of a violation. So it's not a 49/1 rule. And, in any case, 100% of US jurisdictions prohibit driving at a speed above the safe and reasonable speed if that is lower than the posted and/or statutory limit, so you need to be able to determine what is safe for conditions anyway; it's just a minority of states where that is a relevant determination when the results are above the posted limit.

Spivak 9y ago

You have it backwards. Everyone is going to drive fast regardless of the law. Cali is just a state that recognizes this. Writing the law for humans should be celebrated. You can either take that into account or you close your eyes and plug your ears to reality and release a shitty autonomous car.

toast0 9y ago

You may be underestimating the market of Californians who want to drive fast. For a long time, to sell a car in California at all, you had to put a special emissions package together, with was a lot of overhead, but manufacturers still did it, because losing the California market to save overhead doesn't make sense when selling cars.