4 ms·

A handful of years back the NHTSA announced that all new cars would have to have a vehicle to vehicle 5.7-5.9 GHz system for announcing vehicle position, veloci

A handful of years back the NHTSA announced that all new cars would have to have a vehicle to vehicle 5.7-5.9 GHz system for announcing vehicle position, velocity, and cryptographically signed ID. Luckily the dates just came and went and the manufacturers didn't do it. The NHTSA folded and eventually the FCC gave that ~hundreds MHz of 5 GHz band back to wifi. Hopefully that's what will happen here. The NTSB only recommends things to the NHTSA. So this proposal hasn't even gotten as far as the above example.

theknocker 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ozfive 4y ago
Not really sure what you're arguing for here. Are you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both?
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both? I’m against a system that refuses to let me drive because it thinks I’m drunk. Or a system that would prevent me from breaking the speed limit, at my discretion, e.g. in an emergency.
  - Pet_Ant 4y ago
    I'm against disabling cars, but all for automatically notifying 911.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > against disabling cars, but all for automatically notifying 911 Depending on the system's accuracy, this could be a fair compromise. Alternatively: a black box record in case something goes wrong. Less preventative. But deterring and reasonable.
  - williamsmj 4y ago
    Are you saying that anyone should be allowed to drive whatever speed they like, based on their "discretion"? If so, is that different from getting rid of speed limits?
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      Distinguish "anyone should be capable of driving whatever speed they like" vs. "it should be legal for anyone to drive whatever speed they like".
      - lamontcg 4y ago
        Most people aren't capable of driving as fast as a trained emergency responder, much less driving like a psycho in a panic because they're dealing with a medical emergency and are completely emotionally unprepared for it. I've been involved in an situation that resulted in a fatality and trying to rescue the victim and for an untrained responder your ability to think and process gets chopped down to around 25% of what it is normally. That is probably worse if the victim is someone you know. Now you want to argue that those people should be driving 100 mph through the streets blowing through red lights and whatever at their own discretion like that solves problems. People need to call 911 and get the ambulance, which can stabilize the patient, to come to them. They can run code red and are trained in how to run red lights and get around traffic safely. They do it for a living and they're emotionally detached from the emergency. Not to mention that the tires on the average vehicle shouldn't be driven that fast and they're probably nearly bald due to lack of maintenance.
        sattoshi 4y ago
        Waiting for an ambulance is not a viable strategy everywhere. In Canada, you’ll be lucky to see one show up at all. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-woman-stroke-answers-1.6574074 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-woman-str...
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  > Not really sure what you're arguing for here. Are you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both? Your strawman is naked. You should dress him in some plausible deniability. There's nothing in the comment you are replying to to suggest in the slightest way that he is in favor of those things. Just because he's against the flavor of Skynet(TM) you want doesn't mean he's in favor of whatever random "bad thing" you want to paint him as in favor of.
- voldacar 4y ago
  I'm for cars which behave correctly. A correctly designed car, like any tool, does exactly what I command it to.
  - KptMarchewa 4y ago
    That would be fine if you weren't driving on public roads.
    - 1shooner 4y ago
      Then why not modify the roads rather than the cars?
  - kiliantics 4y ago
    this incorrectly designed car refuses to make me a sandwich
- rubatuga 4y ago
  Driving on the 401 in Toronto, cars are usually going 130 km/he in a 100 km/hr zone. People get to their destinations safely. The unnecessary complexity and price of a speed limiter is not worth it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
superkuh 4y ago
Since some people don't believe this happened here is an overview of how the the requirement which once seemed inevitable, never happened: https://jalopnik.com/self-driving-car-tech-forgotten-by-automakers-is-still-1849475361 https://jalopnik.com/self-driving-car-tech-forgotten-by-auto... https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-12/pdf/2016-31059.pdf https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-12/pdf/2016-31059.p... >Assuming a final rule is issued in 2019, this would mean that the phase-in period would begin in 2021, and all vehicles subject to that final rule would be required to comply in 2023. See also, https://www.electronicdesign.com/blogs/contributed-blogs/archive/communiqu/article/21178589/electronic-design-whatever-happened-to-dsrc-and-cv2x https://www.electronicdesign.com/blogs/contributed-blogs/arc... And here's is my 2017 post on alt.cyberpunk about the ruling and a link to an articles about it back then, https://groups.google.com/g/alt.cyberpunk/c/YpRasEtoOwA https://groups.google.com/g/alt.cyberpunk/c/YpRasEtoOwA , https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/06/21/killing-car-privacy-by-federal-mandate/ https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/06/21/killing-car-privacy... and https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/danger-ahead-governments-plan-vehicle-vehicle-communication-threatens-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/danger-ahead-governmen...

theknocker 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ozfive 4y ago

Not really sure what you're arguing for here. Are you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both?

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both? I’m against a system that refuses to let me drive because it thinks I’m drunk. Or a system that would prevent me from breaking the speed limit, at my discretion, e.g. in an emergency.
- Pet_Ant 4y ago
  I'm against disabling cars, but all for automatically notifying 911.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > against disabling cars, but all for automatically notifying 911 Depending on the system's accuracy, this could be a fair compromise. Alternatively: a black box record in case something goes wrong. Less preventative. But deterring and reasonable.
- williamsmj 4y ago
  Are you saying that anyone should be allowed to drive whatever speed they like, based on their "discretion"? If so, is that different from getting rid of speed limits?
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    Distinguish "anyone should be capable of driving whatever speed they like" vs. "it should be legal for anyone to drive whatever speed they like".
    - lamontcg 4y ago
      Most people aren't capable of driving as fast as a trained emergency responder, much less driving like a psycho in a panic because they're dealing with a medical emergency and are completely emotionally unprepared for it. I've been involved in an situation that resulted in a fatality and trying to rescue the victim and for an untrained responder your ability to think and process gets chopped down to around 25% of what it is normally. That is probably worse if the victim is someone you know. Now you want to argue that those people should be driving 100 mph through the streets blowing through red lights and whatever at their own discretion like that solves problems. People need to call 911 and get the ambulance, which can stabilize the patient, to come to them. They can run code red and are trained in how to run red lights and get around traffic safely. They do it for a living and they're emotionally detached from the emergency. Not to mention that the tires on the average vehicle shouldn't be driven that fast and they're probably nearly bald due to lack of maintenance.
      - sattoshi 4y ago
        Waiting for an ambulance is not a viable strategy everywhere. In Canada, you’ll be lucky to see one show up at all. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-woman-stroke-answers-1.6574074 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-woman-str...
throwaway0a5e 4y ago
> Not really sure what you're arguing for here. Are you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both? Your strawman is naked. You should dress him in some plausible deniability. There's nothing in the comment you are replying to to suggest in the slightest way that he is in favor of those things. Just because he's against the flavor of Skynet(TM) you want doesn't mean he's in favor of whatever random "bad thing" you want to paint him as in favor of.
voldacar 4y ago
I'm for cars which behave correctly. A correctly designed car, like any tool, does exactly what I command it to.
- KptMarchewa 4y ago
  That would be fine if you weren't driving on public roads.
  - 1shooner 4y ago
    Then why not modify the roads rather than the cars?
- kiliantics 4y ago
  this incorrectly designed car refuses to make me a sandwich
rubatuga 4y ago
Driving on the 401 in Toronto, cars are usually going 130 km/he in a 100 km/hr zone. People get to their destinations safely. The unnecessary complexity and price of a speed limiter is not worth it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

superkuh 4y ago

Since some people don't believe this happened here is an overview of how the the requirement which once seemed inevitable, never happened: https://jalopnik.com/self-driving-car-tech-forgotten-by-automakers-is-still-1849475361 https://jalopnik.com/self-driving-car-tech-forgotten-by-auto... https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-12/pdf/2016-31059.pdf https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-12/pdf/2016-31059.p... >Assuming a final rule is issued in 2019, this would mean that the phase-in period would begin in 2021, and all vehicles subject to that final rule would be required to comply in 2023. See also, https://www.electronicdesign.com/blogs/contributed-blogs/archive/communiqu/article/21178589/electronic-design-whatever-happened-to-dsrc-and-cv2x https://www.electronicdesign.com/blogs/contributed-blogs/arc... And here's is my 2017 post on alt.cyberpunk about the ruling and a link to an articles about it back then, https://groups.google.com/g/alt.cyberpunk/c/YpRasEtoOwA https://groups.google.com/g/alt.cyberpunk/c/YpRasEtoOwA , https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/06/21/killing-car-privacy-by-federal-mandate/ https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/06/21/killing-car-privacy... and https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/danger-ahead-governments-plan-vehicle-vehicle-communication-threatens-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/danger-ahead-governmen...