5 ms·
In Orlando FL, (one of the car-crash capitals of the world), the devices would be issuing warnings every 15 minutes (causing warning fatigue). I have to deal w
by maeon3 14y ago
In Orlando FL, (one of the car-crash capitals of the world), the devices would be issuing warnings every 15 minutes (causing warning fatigue). I have to deal with these situations:
1. I am cruising on a road 45 mph. A perpendicular street intersecting the road has a stop sign. They are accelerating toward their stop sign. If they don't brake, there will be a collision. I often brake a little and prepare to brake hard if they don't brake at the last possible millisecond. A collision system would warn me in that situation.
2. People behind you accelerate up to you to 5 feet behind your bumper to "make a statement" that they didn't approve you pulling in front of them. Ethics aside, the system would think the person behind is out of control, causing a warning.
3. On the interstate going 75mph, cars pull in front of you with about 5 feet to spare. Cars coming into near contact with each other. A crash detection system would issue a warning.
So it means these crash detection systems need a "Tolerance" dial, that the idiot drivers are going to set as close to zero as possible because of warning fatigue. Also, this system will embolden the idiot drivers to drive even more dangerously. A system like this must account for warning fatigue in places where people drive like in Grand Theft Auto and would be confused if a system told them that what they are doing is dangerous.
- sneak 14y ago> A system like this must account for warning fatigue in places where people drive like in Grand Theft Auto and would be confused if a system told them that what they are doing is dangerous. No, it doesn't. In that case, people will just disable it or ignore the warnings, and continue their existing unsafe practices. People who drive like that aren't going to improve because of a box beeping at them. I don't think that widespread reckless driving is a problem that can be solved with technology, short of full automation (driverless cars). I'm not saying this isn't useful - but for those drivers, feedback that what they're doing is dangerous isn't going to change their behavior. Deploy it anyway, for the rest of us. It at least won't make reckless drivers any worse.
- slug 14y agoit would be interesting to have those warnings go directly to the car black box, even when disabled, it might help in case of collision. Or have it send the "log" every month to the DMV and remove points from the driver's license, and revoke it when it reaches zero, but this sounds too Orwellian to many people.
- sageikosa 14y agoReminds me of the Fifth Element: "You have 5 points left on your license"
- mseebach 14y agoThat's because automated law enforcement is an Orwellian idea.
- moe 14y agoI'll happily take that kind of Orwell on my streets. We have automatic speed-cameras and automatic toll systems already. Bus and truck drivers are required to have a blackbox onboard (mainly to control that drivers don't exceed their allowed driving-periods). I wouldn't mind a mandatory blackbox to record driving patterns. Feel free to go full Orwell and compute my insurance rate from my driving patterns, because that would most certainly fix quite a few reckless drivers. As long as the process is transparent (i.e. everyone knows about it and the algorithms are open source) I don't see a problem with that at all. Streets are a highly regulated environment anyway (for good reasons) and since we're approaching the era of driverless cars this is just logical progression.
- mseebach 14y agoWell, Orwell isn't to be read as a prescriptive list of things you can't do. The problem with automated law enforcement is quite simple: It operates in the gap between that which is dangerous enough that society decides to punish offenders, yet not dangerous enough that society needs to intervene to make the offender stop offending. That coupled with the perverse incentives of fines being a source of revenue, and you have a recipe for law enforcement gone wrong. Also, not explicitly linked to automated LE, but emphasised by it, is the graduation away from discretion in driving. Many drivers tend to forget that the fastest you can ever drive, anywhere, is as fast as is responsible. Even on German autobahns with no speed limit, you can get a steep ticket for going too fast - this is at the discretion of a police officer and ultimately the courts. Automated LE wipes out that discretion in favour of determinism. > As long as the process is transparent (i.e. everyone knows about it and the algorithms are open source) I don't see a problem with that at all. Well, you have near perfect empirical evidence to expect that won't be the case.
- excuse-me 14y agoOr in a BMW it would just be wired to the ignition. - you are driving too fast / you are too close / you didn't stop at the red light - on a continuous loop.