4 ms·

I agree, but if I understood correctly your previous reasoning, the passengers of the robotic vehicle put themselves 'in the game', not only more than roadside

by narag 3y ago

I agree, but if I understood correctly your previous reasoning, the passengers of the robotic vehicle put themselves 'in the game', not only more than roadside bystanders, but also more than others in vehicles that are driven respecting the rules. I used to drive to work every day, very busy highway, and faced an annoying dilemma. If I kept a safe distance, the driver immediately behind me would pass me inserting himself in the gap, forcing me to brake and leaving more distance, inviting a new vehicle to pass me. Or I could tailgate and risk being part of the next multiple colision accident. After seen a couple of those, no thanks. This is the kind of human idiocy that robots were suppossed to avoid. But if they're going to mimic it, what's the point? We will be competing with them and sooner than later, we will see how big companies behind them will outmanouver us, also in courts. So not as optimistic as you about regulation.

JoeAltmaier 3y ago
It's impossible to have a completely safe following distance. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. So we can only trust in probability and do the best we can. Robot or human, same issue.
- narag 3y ago
  "Safe" is a simplification, but some practices are obviously wrong, like less than the length of two vehicles at 120 kmH. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. That's a tricky reasoning line. Safe distance is not intended for those cases. The point is that, given a colision, it won't be propagated. About congestion, it doesn't seem a problem if you can drive fast enough to make an issue of keeping the distance. Bottlenecks come mostly from exits.

by narag 3y ago

JoeAltmaier 3y ago

It's impossible to have a completely safe following distance. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. So we can only trust in probability and do the best we can. Robot or human, same issue.

narag 3y ago
"Safe" is a simplification, but some practices are obviously wrong, like less than the length of two vehicles at 120 kmH. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. That's a tricky reasoning line. Safe distance is not intended for those cases. The point is that, given a colision, it won't be propagated. About congestion, it doesn't seem a problem if you can drive fast enough to make an issue of keeping the distance. Bottlenecks come mostly from exits.