3 ms·

Yes, we do. Every single car should be tracked. 40,000 people are killed every year due to car drivers, we should start taking this seriously.

Franciscouzo 7y ago
That just sounds like a band-aid solution, what is needed are walkable cities, and decent public transportation.
- megaremote 7y ago
  That just sounds like a huge change that will take a long time and a lot of money to do.
  - uoaei 7y ago
    With all the discussion on HN about "technical debt" I wonder why the same sort of strategies to avoid technical debt aren't applied outside the domain of software engineering. Sure, it's effort now to do the smarter-but-harder thing, but the payoff will be huge in a few decades. Sure beats having a police state that is precipitated by goody-two-shoes demanding video surveillance of nearly all public roads in the USA.
    - badwolf 7y ago
      Probably because leaders have to get elected, and "we're going to work through this backlog" is far less exciting in general to "new features!"
  - ddingus 7y ago
    Well, in the US, that means jobs, and we've got the money. Done right, it makes us worth more and won't even have a meaningful impact on the overall value of currency.
- bogomipz 7y ago
  Well New York City is the epitome of a "walkable city" and also has "decent public transportation." Yet there's no shortage of either cars and drivers behind the wheel texting.
LocalH 7y ago
That's an awfully dystopian viewpoint. Ever-present surveillance is a cancer on society, and we shouldn't be increasing the amount of surveillance that happens.
manigandham 7y ago
There is an eternal balance between freedom and privacy for the sake of security. The US has usually remained on the freedom side but rights are being eroded constantly. There are better ways to increase driver and road safety than setting up an ever-present surveillance network in every city. I'm surprised by how many HN users argue against surveillance (for example some fuzzy ad tracking) and yet are fine with having recordings of every physical movement.
donatj 7y ago
Serious question - why? Car related deaths are at the lowest they’ve been per capita in 80 years [1]. Seems to me like we don’t really need to do anything. Hardly seems justified to bring in draconian AI. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File%3AUS_traffic_deaths_per_VMT%2C_VMT%2C_per_capita%2C_and_total_annual_deaths.png https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_...

Franciscouzo 7y ago

That just sounds like a band-aid solution, what is needed are walkable cities, and decent public transportation.

megaremote 7y ago
That just sounds like a huge change that will take a long time and a lot of money to do.
- uoaei 7y ago
  With all the discussion on HN about "technical debt" I wonder why the same sort of strategies to avoid technical debt aren't applied outside the domain of software engineering. Sure, it's effort now to do the smarter-but-harder thing, but the payoff will be huge in a few decades. Sure beats having a police state that is precipitated by goody-two-shoes demanding video surveillance of nearly all public roads in the USA.
  - badwolf 7y ago
    Probably because leaders have to get elected, and "we're going to work through this backlog" is far less exciting in general to "new features!"
- ddingus 7y ago
  Well, in the US, that means jobs, and we've got the money. Done right, it makes us worth more and won't even have a meaningful impact on the overall value of currency.
bogomipz 7y ago
Well New York City is the epitome of a "walkable city" and also has "decent public transportation." Yet there's no shortage of either cars and drivers behind the wheel texting.

LocalH 7y ago

That's an awfully dystopian viewpoint. Ever-present surveillance is a cancer on society, and we shouldn't be increasing the amount of surveillance that happens.

manigandham 7y ago

There is an eternal balance between freedom and privacy for the sake of security. The US has usually remained on the freedom side but rights are being eroded constantly. There are better ways to increase driver and road safety than setting up an ever-present surveillance network in every city. I'm surprised by how many HN users argue against surveillance (for example some fuzzy ad tracking) and yet are fine with having recordings of every physical movement.

donatj 7y ago

Serious question - why? Car related deaths are at the lowest they’ve been per capita in 80 years [1]. Seems to me like we don’t really need to do anything. Hardly seems justified to bring in draconian AI. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File%3AUS_traffic_deaths_per_VMT%2C_VMT%2C_per_capita%2C_and_total_annual_deaths.png https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_...