4 ms·

Hopefully the EU's right to repair allows consumers to fix their cars by removing this malware.

by bowmessage 2y ago

croes 2y ago
If you have relatives who got killed by a speeder you may think differently.
- gambiting 2y ago
  Given that the tech doesn't actually work reliably I'd remove it even without any intention to speed. It's the same reason why I keep lane keeping assistance off in my car - not because I disagree with the idea, but because the implementation is so bad it's actively dangerous.
- ars 2y ago
  The slight speed increase that ordinary people do does not kill people. We aren't talking about people going freeway speed in a residential area.
  - Thorrez 2y ago
    Increasing speed increases the chance that someone will die in a crash if it happens, and also increases the chance that a crash will happen. Check out these graphs: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Res...
  - Symbiote 2y ago
    The "normal" speeding in residential areas absolutely does increase the chance of death and injury in a collision with a pedestrian or cyclist. K = m v² That energy increases with the square of the speed, and has to go somewhere (person's body) in a collision.
    - beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
      It reduces the amount of time you are in the residential area meaning there is less opportunity to even contact a pedestrian or cyclist. At the extreme in some areas if you could go the speed of light you could essentially pick a time when no pedestrian could even possibly enter the road while you are on it.
- alfalfasprout 2y ago
  Crashing into another person is the problem-- not that they were speeding. Unless they were driving recklessly in a congested area in which case this would do nothing to help.
  - croes 2y ago
    That's like saying, it's not the fall that kills you but the landing. If you crash with higher speed you inflect more damage.

Hopefully the EU's right to repair allows consumers to fix their cars by removing this malware.

croes 2y ago

If you have relatives who got killed by a speeder you may think differently.

gambiting 2y ago
Given that the tech doesn't actually work reliably I'd remove it even without any intention to speed. It's the same reason why I keep lane keeping assistance off in my car - not because I disagree with the idea, but because the implementation is so bad it's actively dangerous.
ars 2y ago
The slight speed increase that ordinary people do does not kill people. We aren't talking about people going freeway speed in a residential area.
- Thorrez 2y ago
  Increasing speed increases the chance that someone will die in a crash if it happens, and also increases the chance that a crash will happen. Check out these graphs: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Res...
- Symbiote 2y ago
  The "normal" speeding in residential areas absolutely does increase the chance of death and injury in a collision with a pedestrian or cyclist. K = m v² That energy increases with the square of the speed, and has to go somewhere (person's body) in a collision.
  - beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
    It reduces the amount of time you are in the residential area meaning there is less opportunity to even contact a pedestrian or cyclist. At the extreme in some areas if you could go the speed of light you could essentially pick a time when no pedestrian could even possibly enter the road while you are on it.
alfalfasprout 2y ago
Crashing into another person is the problem-- not that they were speeding. Unless they were driving recklessly in a congested area in which case this would do nothing to help.
- croes 2y ago
  That's like saying, it's not the fall that kills you but the landing. If you crash with higher speed you inflect more damage.