3 ms·

> but it's cold hard physics It is if you assume the car is a vintage box car from before the 80's where you might or might not have airbags at all. New cars a

by judge2020 4y ago

> but it's cold hard physics It is if you assume the car is a vintage box car from before the 80's where you might or might not have airbags at all. New cars are designed to crumble and deploy airbags to absorb that impact so that the squishy humans inside the car don't experience anything nearly that high. Nowadays the biggest risk is speeding, as it negates the advances in car safety. > a 5 mph increase in the maximum state speed limit was associated with an 8 percent increase in fatality rates on interstates and freeways and a 3 percent increase on other roads https://www.iihs.org/topics/speed#effects-of-speed-limits-on-safety:~:text=An%20IIHS%20study%20examined%20longer%2Dterm%20changes.%20During%201993%2D2017%2C%20a%205%20mph%20increase%20in%20the%20maximum%20state%20speed%20limit%20was%20associated%20with%20an%208%20percent%20increase%20in%20fatality%20rates%20on%20interstates%20and%20freeways%20and%20a%203%20percent%20increase%20on%20other%20roads%20(Farmer%2C%202019) https://www.iihs.org/topics/speed#effects-of-speed-limits-on....

supportlocal4h 4y ago
Maybe it's just me, but I took the original concern to be for people and objects outside the car. It's a bit jarring for your only concern to be the passengers.
- judge2020 4y ago
  I was under the assumption that "the driver's momentum was around 67.000 kg*m/s" in the top parent comment meant we were talking about a human confined within a car. This is also supported by how @butwhywhyoh says " then you compare it to an impact without describing exactly what you're comparing" in which @trgn still doesn't say clarify what sort of comparison he's making. It's an argument against using some irrelevant momentum number in a comment. Without showing this momentum number, their comment is just "I'd say it's gross negligence to drive that fast at all on any surface street with sidewalks, traffic lights, intersections, stores, whether the driver is asleep at the wheel or not, autopilot or not, drugged or not" which certainly wouldn't get as much engagement on HN.

supportlocal4h 4y ago

Maybe it's just me, but I took the original concern to be for people and objects outside the car. It's a bit jarring for your only concern to be the passengers.

judge2020 4y ago
I was under the assumption that "the driver's momentum was around 67.000 kg*m/s" in the top parent comment meant we were talking about a human confined within a car. This is also supported by how @butwhywhyoh says " then you compare it to an impact without describing exactly what you're comparing" in which @trgn still doesn't say clarify what sort of comparison he's making. It's an argument against using some irrelevant momentum number in a comment. Without showing this momentum number, their comment is just "I'd say it's gross negligence to drive that fast at all on any surface street with sidewalks, traffic lights, intersections, stores, whether the driver is asleep at the wheel or not, autopilot or not, drugged or not" which certainly wouldn't get as much engagement on HN.