3 ms·

There would be less need for safety technology if everyone was driving around at 60kph, not 100kph. A lighter battery would last much further.. lower cost vehic

There would be less need for safety technology if everyone was driving around at 60kph, not 100kph. A lighter battery would last much further.. lower cost vehicles.. less environmental impact.. less noise around populated areas etc. It would take longer to cover long distances, but.. smell the roses, or take a train? Pipe dream obviously.

freeflight 8y ago
> There would be less need for safety technology if everyone was driving around at 60kph, not 100kph. That's like saying you don't need to wear a helmet while bicycling as long as you don't go faster than X. When in reality just falling over while standing still, can already give you quite a good knock on your head, depending on where you are landing with it. Just like you can't control the speed of other traffic participants. Even if you lowered the allowed speeds across the board, people would still end up speeding, probably even more so than they are doing already. In that context safety features should never be "optional extras" [0] because they usually are not "trade-offs" but straight up improvements. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/business/boeing-safety-features-charge.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/business/boeing-safety-fe...
- adrianN 8y ago
  There is very effective technology to prevent speeding. We just need to build more of it.