4 ms·

> Speeding is one of the largest behavioral contributors to traffic fatalities Yes, this is true. In every study that's been done on this matter in the US, it

> Speeding is one of the largest behavioral contributors to traffic fatalities Yes, this is true. In every study that's been done on this matter in the US, it's been determined that drivers who speed have a lower probability of getting into an accident, but when they do it has a higher probability of being fatal. At basic pass, this makes sense, as there's more energy involved in the crash if one or both drivers are at higher rates of speed. Why this doesn't bother me, is because I'm not concerned with behaviors that increase or decrease fatality, I'm concerned with behaviors that increase or decrease the risk of an accident happening in the first place. Speeding does not cause accidents, and all of the evidence supports this. The motorcyclist /does/ cause accidents, generally fatal accidents (although only for themselves).

dahart 5y ago
Also seems strange to dismiss outcomes in favor of incidents. Most incidents are slow-speed fender-benders that don’t hurt anyone. You’re skewing the data to worry more about those than whether you actually get hurt. Same is true of worrying about motorcyclists. If they hurt themselves, it doesn’t affect you. If you care about whether you’ll get hurt, which sounded like your initial premise, then it’s a good idea to worry more about the statistics of outcomes than of whether there’s an accident or not, especially if many accidents are injury-free, right?
- tristor 5y ago
  It depends on what you are optimizing for. Personally, I would like to optimize for a roadway that's more /safe for me/. I am not concerned with /me/ causing an accident, I am concerned with someone else causing an accident with me by doing something grossly negligent or downright stupid. I am a very skilled and comfortable driver compared to the average in the US. The speed of me and the other driver only comes into a factor in this calculation after the accident has happened. If the accident never happens, the speed is irrelevant. So I am focused on what reduces the probability of accidents occurring (not to mention that they are a problem to deal with even when it's low-speed). I'm nearly 40 and I've managed to avoid ever being in any accidents other than being rear-ended while stopped (and in one case while parked and not even in the car), because I'm a skilled driver who pays attention and can generally avoid the mass quantity of idiots on the roadway. It's not for lack of trying to hit me on the part of others, though. I'd much rather have a less stressful driving experience (that's probably materially impacting the number of quality adjusted years of living I have) by everyone driving more attentively and reasonably.
  - dahart 5y ago
    > Personally, I would like to optimize for a roadway that's more /safe for me/. Exactly. This is exactly why you should care about speeding, and not about motorcycles, cops, or slow left lane drivers. You & others speeding is a bigger risk to your safety than all those other things combined, by many multiples. > The speed of me and the other driver only comes into a factor in this calculation after the accident has happened. I don’t understand what you mean, can you elaborate? Speed is safe until after you crash? Are you suggesting it’s not a cause? Everyone believes they’re an above average driver, you’re demonstrating one of the most common biases on the road. Btw in light of the fact that most accidents happen at lower speed you may also be demonstrating a correlation-causation accident by asserting that speeding is safer. Driving faster does not reduce your risks, generally speaking.
    - tristor 5y ago
      I feel as though we are talking past each other and I've been quite clear in my statements. Yes, until you crash, speed is safe, nearly by definition. Or as the saying goes, "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing." Two drivers who are paying attention, signalling lane changes, and maintaining lane keeping, where one driver passes the other on the left doing 90mph as the other driver is doing 80mph in a 65mph zone on a clear sunny day without heavy traffic are not in any way increasing the risk profile of each other by exceeding the speed limit or speeding in relation to one another. One of those drivers staring at an iPad playing a movie in the center of their steering wheel rather than at the road and weaving erratically MASSIVELY increases the risk profile of themselves and other drivers on the road, /regardless/ of the speed they are moving at. > Everyone believes they’re an above average driver, you’re demonstrating one of the most common biases on the road. Sure, and in my case it's actually true. I don't feel like it's necessary to list off credentials, but if you had read my other comments you would probably have picked up on the fact that I drive on track. E.g. I have engaged in significant amounts of high-speed maneuvering under professional instruction and solo that exceeds the level of car control understanding necessary for driving under normal road conditions. I hold a competition racing license from more than one racing body, and have lived and drove outside the US where I was licensed to drive under much more rigorous conditions than required to get a license in the US. While this is a common bias, in my case, it is absolutely true that I am a better driver who is more educated about vehicle dynamics and car control than the average driver on US roads. > Btw in light of the fact that most accidents happen at lower speed you may also be demonstrating a correlation-causation accident by asserting that speeding is safer. Driving faster does not reduce your risks. Every single study on this matter I've seen that was conducted in the US clearly showed that increases in speed increased the probability of fatalities when an accident occured /and/ lowered the probability of an accident occurring. I don't know the "cause" of this, but I have a few guesses, my primary one being that people who speed habitually tend to be more focused on driving and that lowering speeds results in driving being boring which causes attention to shift. But that's just a guess. The evidence supports my viewpoint, and I've already pointed out to you directly that I am optimizing personally, for reducing the probability of an accident occurring, not the consequences of an accident when it does occur.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

dahart 5y ago

Also seems strange to dismiss outcomes in favor of incidents. Most incidents are slow-speed fender-benders that don’t hurt anyone. You’re skewing the data to worry more about those than whether you actually get hurt. Same is true of worrying about motorcyclists. If they hurt themselves, it doesn’t affect you. If you care about whether you’ll get hurt, which sounded like your initial premise, then it’s a good idea to worry more about the statistics of outcomes than of whether there’s an accident or not, especially if many accidents are injury-free, right?

tristor 5y ago
It depends on what you are optimizing for. Personally, I would like to optimize for a roadway that's more /safe for me/. I am not concerned with /me/ causing an accident, I am concerned with someone else causing an accident with me by doing something grossly negligent or downright stupid. I am a very skilled and comfortable driver compared to the average in the US. The speed of me and the other driver only comes into a factor in this calculation after the accident has happened. If the accident never happens, the speed is irrelevant. So I am focused on what reduces the probability of accidents occurring (not to mention that they are a problem to deal with even when it's low-speed). I'm nearly 40 and I've managed to avoid ever being in any accidents other than being rear-ended while stopped (and in one case while parked and not even in the car), because I'm a skilled driver who pays attention and can generally avoid the mass quantity of idiots on the roadway. It's not for lack of trying to hit me on the part of others, though. I'd much rather have a less stressful driving experience (that's probably materially impacting the number of quality adjusted years of living I have) by everyone driving more attentively and reasonably.
- dahart 5y ago
  > Personally, I would like to optimize for a roadway that's more /safe for me/. Exactly. This is exactly why you should care about speeding, and not about motorcycles, cops, or slow left lane drivers. You & others speeding is a bigger risk to your safety than all those other things combined, by many multiples. > The speed of me and the other driver only comes into a factor in this calculation after the accident has happened. I don’t understand what you mean, can you elaborate? Speed is safe until after you crash? Are you suggesting it’s not a cause? Everyone believes they’re an above average driver, you’re demonstrating one of the most common biases on the road. Btw in light of the fact that most accidents happen at lower speed you may also be demonstrating a correlation-causation accident by asserting that speeding is safer. Driving faster does not reduce your risks, generally speaking.
  - tristor 5y ago
    I feel as though we are talking past each other and I've been quite clear in my statements. Yes, until you crash, speed is safe, nearly by definition. Or as the saying goes, "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing." Two drivers who are paying attention, signalling lane changes, and maintaining lane keeping, where one driver passes the other on the left doing 90mph as the other driver is doing 80mph in a 65mph zone on a clear sunny day without heavy traffic are not in any way increasing the risk profile of each other by exceeding the speed limit or speeding in relation to one another. One of those drivers staring at an iPad playing a movie in the center of their steering wheel rather than at the road and weaving erratically MASSIVELY increases the risk profile of themselves and other drivers on the road, /regardless/ of the speed they are moving at. > Everyone believes they’re an above average driver, you’re demonstrating one of the most common biases on the road. Sure, and in my case it's actually true. I don't feel like it's necessary to list off credentials, but if you had read my other comments you would probably have picked up on the fact that I drive on track. E.g. I have engaged in significant amounts of high-speed maneuvering under professional instruction and solo that exceeds the level of car control understanding necessary for driving under normal road conditions. I hold a competition racing license from more than one racing body, and have lived and drove outside the US where I was licensed to drive under much more rigorous conditions than required to get a license in the US. While this is a common bias, in my case, it is absolutely true that I am a better driver who is more educated about vehicle dynamics and car control than the average driver on US roads. > Btw in light of the fact that most accidents happen at lower speed you may also be demonstrating a correlation-causation accident by asserting that speeding is safer. Driving faster does not reduce your risks. Every single study on this matter I've seen that was conducted in the US clearly showed that increases in speed increased the probability of fatalities when an accident occured /and/ lowered the probability of an accident occurring. I don't know the "cause" of this, but I have a few guesses, my primary one being that people who speed habitually tend to be more focused on driving and that lowering speeds results in driving being boring which causes attention to shift. But that's just a guess. The evidence supports my viewpoint, and I've already pointed out to you directly that I am optimizing personally, for reducing the probability of an accident occurring, not the consequences of an accident when it does occur.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]