4 ms·

it 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 "l

by slug 14y ago

it 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 ago
Reminds me of the Fifth Element: "You have 5 points left on your license"
mseebach 14y ago
That's because automated law enforcement is an Orwellian idea.
- moe 14y ago
  I'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 ago
    Well, 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.
vyrotek 14y ago
There's a device called Snapshot from Progressive that seems to do this. In fact, they set your car insurance rates based on the logs. You plug it in right under your dash.
- excuse-me 14y ago
  The problem is that it's based on YOUR sudden braking So some idiot cuts you up and you brake to give them a safety zone - you are penalized, if you blindly drive at top speed causing total chaos the box gives you a gold star

by slug 14y ago

sageikosa 14y ago

Reminds me of the Fifth Element: "You have 5 points left on your license"

mseebach 14y ago

That's because automated law enforcement is an Orwellian idea.

moe 14y ago
I'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 ago
  Well, 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.

vyrotek 14y ago

There's a device called Snapshot from Progressive that seems to do this. In fact, they set your car insurance rates based on the logs. You plug it in right under your dash.

excuse-me 14y ago
The problem is that it's based on YOUR sudden braking So some idiot cuts you up and you brake to give them a safety zone - you are penalized, if you blindly drive at top speed causing total chaos the box gives you a gold star