5 ms·
> Slowing down is braking surely? No, it's your last resort if you must slow down. Better drivers learn to coast, down-shift, or tricks such as using the sligh
by tombrossman 8y ago
> Slowing down is braking surely?
No, it's your last resort if you must slow down. Better drivers learn to coast, down-shift, or tricks such as using the slight uphill grade of a roadway to adjust speed without resorting to braking.
Next time you are driving and have good visibility far ahead in a long line of cars (such as approaching a big hill) watch for the cars with the brake lights coming on constantly. These are the less capable drivers, and once you spot them you will see them making other mistakes. For example, one trick I've learned is to watch for the driver's hand resting on the turn signal stalk in adjacent lanes as I approach. This is a tell that they are intending to cut me off. When I spot it, I can back off to anticipate them, or be more aggressive and accelerate to close the gap they were aiming for.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y agoSemantics. All the actions you listed in your first paragraph can be considered braking maneuvers.
- notahacker 8y agoIt's not semantics when self driving technologies rely more on superior reflexes to brake late in response to stuff suddenly appearing in the roadway to compensate for inferior ability to adjust ambient speed through better anticipation of how likely a particular mammal on the pavement is to step out into it.
- icebraining 8y agoAnimats' point is that if you break and avoiding hitting anyone, there's no trolley problem. How you break is an important but unrelated question.
- notahacker 8y agoI think you're right about the original point, but the wider counter argument is that human anticipation is both important in reducing the instances of "trolley problems" (usually not hitting object vs not being rear ended rather than the sillier example from philosophy) and choosing which pedestrians to slow down for and how much (because slowing for all pedestrians is more likely to cause accidents with other vehicles as well as impairing journey progress, and slowing for no pedestrians may lead to you being unable to stop in time) is closer to a trolley problem than something that can easily be generalised. And to respond to another of Animat's original points humans aren't trained to brake/swerve in a harder, more risky manner for obstacles which are animate and not bother risking stopping at all for the unidentified object that appears to be a piece of cloth because unlike AI, this is not something we need to learn. (I agree with his original contention that pure software error and human inability to respond to it is a bigger problem than "trolley problems" with current generation tech)
- tombrossman 8y agoWords matter, and 'brake' or 'braking' have dictionary definitions which contradict your statement. It's an important distinction because experienced drivers know to anticipate problems and slow down before they need to brake. You probably do this already without thinking about it, especially if you drive a manual transmission. Ever drive a speedboat? Same idea, they have no brakes and you learn to look further ahead and anticipate, and allow outside forces to slow you (rather than relying on an internal braking mechanism).
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y agoThat's not fair. 'Brake' also has dictionary definitions that directly support my statement: anything that has a slowing or stopping effect. See http://www.dictionary.com/browse/brake?s=t http://www.dictionary.com/browse/brake?s=t The comment I replied to by tombrossman used the terms coast and down-shift, which are both commonly referred to as engine braking[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking