5 ms·

> Speed is the most dangerous aspect of motor vehicles Not in the way you think. If you're going 55 because it's the speed limit, but everyone else is going 70

> Speed is the most dangerous aspect of motor vehicles Not in the way you think. If you're going 55 because it's the speed limit, but everyone else is going 70, you're the most likely driver to cause a collision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve

paulryanrogers 2y ago
Indeed. Much as buying a smaller car makes you a hazard to everyone nearby because they cannot see you as easily. The most sensible thing for everyone is ever larger and more heavily armored vehicles. Won't someone think of the children. `/s` All that said. If you cannot maneuver safely around drivers going the speed limit then they are not the problem.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Mawr 2y ago
The mental hoops drivers go through to justify their unsafe behaviour...
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Oh please. Let's assume people are going at a speed that the road is designed to handle, since that's usually the case. In that situation, the behavior you're calling out as unsafe is simply "going faster". Now, in a technical sense that's true, but it's always true. Going faster reduces safety when you're above the speed limit. Going faster reduces safety when you're at the speed limit. Going faster reduces safety when you're below the speed limit. If you reduce safety to black and white, then you should always go slower, until you're barely moving. If the speed limit is 40, that doesn't magically make it safe to go 40. Black and white thinking leads to a bad conclusion, so let's add nuance back in. Speed is dangerous but roads are designed to let you go a certain speed while minimizing the danger. You're not being dangerous until you go over that speed. And that speed is almost always higher than the speed limit, especially in good weather. Going over the speed limit is not itself a problem. It's going over the design speed of the road that's a problem.
  - vkou 2y ago
    > Let's assume people are going at a speed that the road is designed to handle Let's not, because most of the speeding I see is from people who very mistakenly think they know what speed the road's designed to handle, because they don't give a crap about pedestrians, bicyclists, visibility, other vehicles, or really, anything but getting to the next red light faster. Perhaps you drive in a utopia that's solely populated by traffic architects, but here in the real world, it's populated by normal people, many of whom are bad drivers, and bad judges of road safety, but are really good at hitting the gas. Our high death rates reflect this.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      > Perhaps you drive in a utopia that's solely populated by traffic architects I drive in an area that has a lot of overbuilt roads, and I don't think that's a very uncommon situation. > they don't give a crap about pedestrians, bicyclists, visibility, other vehicles, or really, anything but getting to the next red light faster That's very dangerous even if you strictly follow the speed limit. It's a separate problem.
    - katbyte 2y ago
      Overbuilt roads aka “strodes”are real common in North America and as people tend to drive the speed they feel is correct not the limit it leads people to going faster and create unsafe situation. There’s a great not just bikes video on this iirc A sign doesn’t really change behaviour but narrowing roads , separated bike lanes, pedestrian controlled crossings, roundabouts, and generally making the road “feel slower” does
      - vkou 2y ago
        I'm aware of this phenomenon. My point is that until the road is narrowed, the safe speed on it may be lower than the average backseat traffic architect might think.
  - scotty79 2y ago
    Kinetic energy is proportional to square of velocity. It doesn't take large speed reduction to halve energies involved and thus the danger. Even not taking into account how crappy human perception and reflexes are.
bpodgursky 2y ago
Regardless, Waymo is under the spotlight and they can't risk the regulatory hit of openly breaking laws, even if it's a perfectly normal thing for a human to do.
senordevnyc 2y ago
Rear-ending someone going slower than you is not their fault.
- serf 2y ago
  >Rear-ending someone going slower than you is not their fault. who gives a shit who is at fault when they're in an accident? the goal is to avoid the event all together, not to have a scapegoat.
  - level1ten 2y ago
    The type of people who see a "lane ends ahead" and immediately merge, blocking up traffic and wasting a half mile of empty lane. "I'm in my assigned place and I did what I was supposed to!!"
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      The thing that blocks up traffic at a merge is when people can't get over smoothly. If everyone gets over at the first opportunity, then things go fine. The empty lane isn't wasted, it absorbs brief bursts in traffic that need more time to get over. But even if it was wasted, that wouldn't be a big deal. A 5-mile long section with fewer lanes and a 5.5-mile long section with fewer lanes will have almost the same throughput. Everyone staying split across two lanes until the end and aligning themselves to do a clean zipper merge also goes fine. What makes everything go wrong is when people drive down the nice empty lane that's ending and intend to do a normal merge at the end, but they don't start it early enough. Then everything slows down as they squeeze over.
      - plaidfuji 2y ago
        In my experience what causes the slowdown are the people who merged too early who then resentfully close the gap in front of them when people try to merge later than them, simultaneously increasing the likelihood that they’ll rear end the car in front of them and making it harder for the people trying to merge properly to do so.
epolanski 2y ago
The wiki you link finds the theory to be biased and without solid backing data. Not sure why did you link it.

paulryanrogers 2y ago

Indeed. Much as buying a smaller car makes you a hazard to everyone nearby because they cannot see you as easily. The most sensible thing for everyone is ever larger and more heavily armored vehicles. Won't someone think of the children. `/s` All that said. If you cannot maneuver safely around drivers going the speed limit then they are not the problem.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Mawr 2y ago

The mental hoops drivers go through to justify their unsafe behaviour...

Dylan16807 2y ago
Oh please. Let's assume people are going at a speed that the road is designed to handle, since that's usually the case. In that situation, the behavior you're calling out as unsafe is simply "going faster". Now, in a technical sense that's true, but it's always true. Going faster reduces safety when you're above the speed limit. Going faster reduces safety when you're at the speed limit. Going faster reduces safety when you're below the speed limit. If you reduce safety to black and white, then you should always go slower, until you're barely moving. If the speed limit is 40, that doesn't magically make it safe to go 40. Black and white thinking leads to a bad conclusion, so let's add nuance back in. Speed is dangerous but roads are designed to let you go a certain speed while minimizing the danger. You're not being dangerous until you go over that speed. And that speed is almost always higher than the speed limit, especially in good weather. Going over the speed limit is not itself a problem. It's going over the design speed of the road that's a problem.
- vkou 2y ago
  > Let's assume people are going at a speed that the road is designed to handle Let's not, because most of the speeding I see is from people who very mistakenly think they know what speed the road's designed to handle, because they don't give a crap about pedestrians, bicyclists, visibility, other vehicles, or really, anything but getting to the next red light faster. Perhaps you drive in a utopia that's solely populated by traffic architects, but here in the real world, it's populated by normal people, many of whom are bad drivers, and bad judges of road safety, but are really good at hitting the gas. Our high death rates reflect this.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > Perhaps you drive in a utopia that's solely populated by traffic architects I drive in an area that has a lot of overbuilt roads, and I don't think that's a very uncommon situation. > they don't give a crap about pedestrians, bicyclists, visibility, other vehicles, or really, anything but getting to the next red light faster That's very dangerous even if you strictly follow the speed limit. It's a separate problem.
  - katbyte 2y ago
    Overbuilt roads aka “strodes”are real common in North America and as people tend to drive the speed they feel is correct not the limit it leads people to going faster and create unsafe situation. There’s a great not just bikes video on this iirc A sign doesn’t really change behaviour but narrowing roads , separated bike lanes, pedestrian controlled crossings, roundabouts, and generally making the road “feel slower” does
    - vkou 2y ago
      I'm aware of this phenomenon. My point is that until the road is narrowed, the safe speed on it may be lower than the average backseat traffic architect might think.
- scotty79 2y ago
  Kinetic energy is proportional to square of velocity. It doesn't take large speed reduction to halve energies involved and thus the danger. Even not taking into account how crappy human perception and reflexes are.

bpodgursky 2y ago

Regardless, Waymo is under the spotlight and they can't risk the regulatory hit of openly breaking laws, even if it's a perfectly normal thing for a human to do.

senordevnyc 2y ago

Rear-ending someone going slower than you is not their fault.

serf 2y ago
>Rear-ending someone going slower than you is not their fault. who gives a shit who is at fault when they're in an accident? the goal is to avoid the event all together, not to have a scapegoat.
- level1ten 2y ago
  The type of people who see a "lane ends ahead" and immediately merge, blocking up traffic and wasting a half mile of empty lane. "I'm in my assigned place and I did what I was supposed to!!"
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    The thing that blocks up traffic at a merge is when people can't get over smoothly. If everyone gets over at the first opportunity, then things go fine. The empty lane isn't wasted, it absorbs brief bursts in traffic that need more time to get over. But even if it was wasted, that wouldn't be a big deal. A 5-mile long section with fewer lanes and a 5.5-mile long section with fewer lanes will have almost the same throughput. Everyone staying split across two lanes until the end and aligning themselves to do a clean zipper merge also goes fine. What makes everything go wrong is when people drive down the nice empty lane that's ending and intend to do a normal merge at the end, but they don't start it early enough. Then everything slows down as they squeeze over.
    - plaidfuji 2y ago
      In my experience what causes the slowdown are the people who merged too early who then resentfully close the gap in front of them when people try to merge later than them, simultaneously increasing the likelihood that they’ll rear end the car in front of them and making it harder for the people trying to merge properly to do so.

epolanski 2y ago

The wiki you link finds the theory to be biased and without solid backing data. Not sure why did you link it.