Slashdot Mirror
EU Set To Mandate Speed Limiters In All New Cars (bbc.co.uk)
AmiMoJo shares a report from the BBC: Speed limiting technology looks set to become mandatory for all vehicles sold in Europe from 2022, after new rules were provisionally agreed by the EU. Road safety charity Brake called it a "landmark day," but the AA said "a little speed" helped with overtaking or joining motorways. Safety measures approved by the European Commission included intelligent speed assistance (ISA), advanced emergency braking and lane-keeping technology. The EU says the plan could help avoid 140,000 serious injuries by 2038 and aims ultimately to cut road deaths to zero by 2050. Under the ISA system, cars receive information via GPS and a digital map, telling the vehicle what the speed limit is. This can be combined with a video camera capable of recognizing road signs. The system can be overridden temporarily. If a car is overtaking a lorry on a motorway and enters a lower speed-limit area, the driver can push down hard on the accelerator to complete the maneuver. According to the report, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault and Volvo already have models available with some of the ISA technology fitted.
Once all the cars are automatically speed limited, governments can save money by reducing highway patrol cops. And once the highway patrol cars are gone, we can hack our cars to override the automatic speed limiter and pass everybody with impunity!
MUAHAHAHAHA!
Germany allowed for impressive fast cars so people can get all over Germany in a shorter time.
To be at a meeting on time, to conduct business. To go on a holiday.
Powerful and safe cars designed for German fast roads. With very advanced medical care that's ready all over Germany.
Now the EU steps in to remove that advanced German technology and returns once advanced Germany to slow Communist East German speed limits.
Now with slower new cars and more tax.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Two important bits in TFA are not mentioned in the summary:
1. there will be a switch to disable the speed limiter until the engine is powered off.
2. The car gets a black box that can be accessed after an accident.
Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
And of course lets not forget exemptions for 'special' people, you know, those with urgent high level government work, like being rich and driving their uber-toys..
Of course it will create a nice little black market in bypass systems...
Of course they say it would have an on-off switch (for a compulsory system? unique), and I am sure that wont be logged and/or reported..
Lets for a moment ignore the fact that speed is not THE cause of most road fatalities (that honor falls to drunk driving, exhaustion, and distracted driving in about that order).
I wonder when they will mandate riders licenses for road use of pushbikes, along with warrants for safety, road taxes, and license plates so that red lights cameras can work on them..
Sigh.
Not everyone lives in a city. Even those that live in metro areas, often have no point to point transportation options beyond cars. It's great when people are so self centered, that they project their own needs on everyone else and then demand the government dictate those limitations on everyone.
Won't work so well in nanny states like Australia, where the max speed is 110 km/h on divided carriage ways, 100 for highways, but mostly 80, and increasingly 50.
It'll be interesting to see how the Aussie state goverments react (particularly Victoria), as a major source of revenue declines.
Or should we expect new car sales to fall off a cliff, as people who want to retain control hang on to their older cars?
Many people fall asleep driving on deserted roads at 100 km/h, helped no doubt by the road signs which subliminally suggest you sleep ("feeling tired?", "fatigue kills" etc). But this tech package seems to have an answer for that as well, with fatigue monitoring.
And what happens when you have a truck up your arse, sitting on your tail because your car is obeying the speed limit? Will the car speed up automatically, or not allow itself to be intimidated (with whatever consequences that may entail for the occupants)?
???...... I love that thing :|
[($)]
How is the insurance company screwing you if you willingly don't comply with the speed limit? Speed limits are there for a reason.
Sig?
...How do you pass a car doing 45 mph on a road limited at 55 mph? The answer is, you don't, and are delayed and consigned to do 45 as long as the bozo in front of you decides to do 45, because it would take too long to pass, and some oncoming car would come out of *somewhere* to give you an exciting ride.
And then of course there is the emergency aspects of this - you're being chased, or you're attempting to get the H out of the woods before it burns down entirely, or you're just keeping in front of the mile-wide tornado, etc. etc.
You're doing the 70 mph limit on an Interstate highway, and want to get into the right lane to exit, and need to sprint ahead just a little to increase clearance with the car behind so you can get in the right lane to access the exit, and... you can't do it. And its FAR more difficult to attempt that by slowing and dropping into a space behind that car, as there may not be such a space, some pinhead without a speed limited car may come racing up just to keep you from being able to do that (every other person on the road is a prick, in case you haven't noticed), and on, and on... 1000's of reasons why this is a bad idea.
The ultimate reason that this is a bad idea is that I would never, ever, ever buy a new car again, and know a lot of people that would feel the same way. I belong to the Sports Car Club of America, about 55,000 people, so there's 55,000 "no sale"s right there. And being how this is the USA, and we are a bit 'round the bend about the freedom thing, one of the biggest reasons we have 350 million privately owned firearms in a country with about 320 million people including the kids, such a car would not make a lot of money being sold here, I think.
Speak for yourself. As a fellow citizen of a EU country, I fear that the EU is fast becoming a nanny state. Be it for our own safety or for control, our everyday things are regulated and snooped more day by day. It's politically incorrect to say this, but I think women leadership has a part in it. Women want everyone to feel secure, but they don't have the same desire for independence and territory that a man has. The development is accelerated by the interests of big money, and by those desiring for the EU to become a superstate.
And if not, why not, they are the ones who _constantly_ and _noisily_ ride way above the speed limit. I don't care about the car driver who's going 57 instead of 55. I care about the biker going 60 in a 20mph zone, or 120 on a mountain road.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
And sleep in onsies...
That's not the insurance company screwing you, that's you screwing the insurance company.
Ezekiel 23:20
This 'feature' really makes me want to buy a new car...
Rear fog lamps.
I guess other countries have similar rules to the UK which is they are only to be used if visibility is less than 100 metres.
If we're talking about mandatory speed limiters on cars, let's also have the speed limited to 40mph whenever the high intensity rear fog lamps are switched on to put a stop to the idiots in over powered cars doing 85mph in the third lane in torrential rain with the fog lamps on.
Real freedom is not needing to own a car (and not have it affect you in the slightest). The best cities are car-free.
No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
He is a Euroweenie. These are people who thought giving up all sovereignty without losing a war was a great idea.
Just ignore them. History will solve the Euroweenie problem.
Considering my car's sign recognition camera routinely misinterprets and claims e.g. the speed limit is 140 in a 50 zone, this should get fun.
If it's on by default, I predict the sales of GPS jammers will skyrocket if this becomes the norm. Not to mention duct tape to cover the sign reading camera. Yes, even if you can actually turn it off in settings, a lot of people simply won't read the damn manual.
Um, what about the poor sod driving a car who has a heart attack? Technically that is a road death.
Of course, they can end ALL road deaths by ripping up all the roads and outlawing vehicles other than horse drawn wagons on paths rather than roads. Or they could simply rename the roads as streets and have no more road deaths. But that's a big cheat, too.
{^_-}
Someone puts up a 0 km/h sign in the middle of a 120 km/h stretch of road?
Will the car just come to a sudden stop with all the cars behind it crashing into it?
The problem is not that it is the cause of accidents. The problem is that it increases the risk of fatalities for all user: https://ec.europa.eu/transport.... Hitting a pedestrian at 32km/h kills the pedestrian 5 times out of 100. Hitting a pedestrian at 64km/h kills the pedestrian 85 times out of 100.
My son enjoy taking is bike to go ride with is friend. I sure hope it doesn't get involve in an accident but if it ever happens, I'd prefer that the car was forcing the driver to respect that 30km/h limit in the village. And if he bypassed the system then he would have to take the responsabilities for it. And by the way, I don't understand people speeding in densely populated area. Most of the time you're doing small distances in those areas. Here in Belgium the 30km/h zones are at most 2km long I'd say. It takes 4 minutes at 30km/h, why would you risk lives of people for earning at most 3 minutes. The speed limits are not there to annoy people, they are there to limit the inertia of your car when you'll hit that wall, people, what else, the day you have a problem. And we all make mistakes and accidents. And also for those "pilots", king of the roads, even if it's not you the problem, if you are speeding on the highway and I overtake someone forgetting to look in my mirror and you hit me, it will be my fault indeed, but we will both die, if you'd respect the speed limit, we'd still be alive so that you would be able to receive the money from my insurance.
This move is a step in the right direction.
What sig ?
aims ultimately to cut road deaths to zero by 2050
You can aim all you want, but cutting road deaths to zero by 2050 is a very naive goal..
Unless we won't have roads anymore....
Don't be so hasty in pointing fingers.
I live in NL, in the so-called "Randstad" area, which is several of their biggest cities situated so close to each other that they form almost uninterrupted metropolitan area along the west coast. I have never owned a car, even my license expired few years ago (and I would not dare use ti without refreshment course anyway). Commuting with bicycles and trains. 300 000 km in the train, about 40 000 km on a bicycle in 17 years.
Such efficient, fast, clean train system is expensive. Really expensive. I work 65 km from home. If I purchase monthly train subscription for this trajectory only it comes to 300 Euro per month (if you subscribe for a full year; month by month it is 350). I use "always free" subscription (travel everywhere at all hours) that costs 342/400 Euros per month. So far every company I worked for covered those expenses in full. If I'd use a car they'd give me 80 Euro per month and that's that.
So, you see that a combination of living and working in the busiest metropolitan areas (I guess substantial portion of the population is concentrated there) plus the generous companies (who do this because they get some tax kick-backs to encourage people to switch to public transport) allows me to use this option. So I can work or read or just doze off during my commute which is great. Also, the women are nice to look at (major users of that transport are the middle and worker classes plus all students at all levels). Do they have plenty of issues with the system? Sure! But the cars also get stuck in jams regularly.
Did I mention I have no children? That's a big one even though helicopter parenting is not as wide spread here as in the USA.
However, once you are out in the countryside it becomes a bit difficult. Transport is available but you have to wait quite a bit. And suddenly traveling with a car is twice as fast as public transport, whereas in the metro area the trains do 140 km/hr (or 160km/hr on one specific and very busy trajectory Amsterdam-Schiphol-Rotterdam) and are as frequent as 4-6 times per hour. And thus, contrary to what some might imagine it is the rural inhabitants and those is small towns that do not use trains and buses so much but make do with cars and motorcycles.
I am not an expert but in my opinion a train system with such efficiency cannot be supported to connect everyone, everywhere for an affordable price. At least for now. But many smart hybrid-like solutions are probably available if we care to implement them. For example, I would love to have properly automated car. Very small, cheap, electric. If I can go in and say "bring me to work" and then read my books....bring it on! No traffic jams, much more efficient use of the roads, improved safety...what's not to like?
In USA I think the cities can do so much more to improve the transport and reduce the car usage. I guess you can build some high speed lines to connect the really big cities....but will it be convenient enough and affordable enough? I don't know but I have the feeling that you can win bigly there ;) And yes, I agree that the car lobby has had too much influence. Still, public transport as it is is not the answer to everything...
I guess the whole point of my ramblings is "It is complicated. Don't be hasty! Think rationally instead of ideologically"
That must be the dumbest reasoning I have ever seen.
What you are saying is that it is ok to put other people's lives at risk without their permission because you want to risk your life and drive at the limits 50 metres away from someone ferrying their children to school.
By the way, I did half a season in the Porsche Cup (a recurring elbow injury forced me to stop), and have risked my life in many other pursuits, so no one really calls me a pussy.
if a politician illegally obtained the info (and it would be illegal under the new privacy law), they'd be digging their own grave.
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
I think that argument cuts both ways to be honest. People who want to commute long distances tend to pretty vocal about societies providing them with good roads, about having parking spaces in the other end, and asking the people in between to put up with the pollution, the noise and the risk of death that they cause.
I think that this argument has held too much credence for a long time, and it is time we should stop. It not an argument about liberty but about what we want our cities to be for.
"No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far."
Your freedom to go where and when you want, unfortunately, contradicts my freedom to go how I want. I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city, with high quality pavements and good bike routes for long distances.
How is the insurance company screwing you if you willingly don't comply with the speed limit? Speed limits are there for a reason.
Yeah, usually populist politics.
Sure, there are obviously sensible limits (residential areas, near schools etc.) but a lot of the speed limits outside the cities are more or less random, guided only by politics. There are areas where a lot of people are affected by accidents and yet the speed limit stay high, and then there are areas where nobody really lives but where lower speed limits suddenly appear. This lack of sense undermines the belief in them and then people tend to drive as they please.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Think rationally instead of ideologically
I wish Dutch politicians would take that and tape it to their bathroom mirrors.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Rules be nice, but no way that the governments are going to lose that big fat cash cow of speeding tickets, so this system will be there, but won't be enforced. The moment they do, the government loses so much money that the ruling will be overturned almost immediately.
"No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far."
Your freedom to go where and when you want, unfortunately, contradicts my freedom to go how I want. I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city, with high quality pavements and good bike routes for long distances.
Likewise, your freedom to quiet, peaceful, unpolluted cities with high-quality pavements and good bike routes contradicts my freedom to a hustle-bustle, high-GDP, high-income and high-tech economic powerhouse city.
How about you stop trying to spin your selfish desires as "MUH FREE-DUMBS"? You want all of that, then move to the damn countryside.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Anyone who thinks Muslins did it from a cave in Afghanistan should do the human race a favor and just kill themselves.
Anyone who thinks some Jews were able to manipulate a bunch of fanatical Muslims (including their leader sitting in a cave in Afghanistan) to execute the complex plan that ended in 9/11 should check his/her tinfoil hat carefully as it seem to be frying the brain.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Sounds a wee bit like the ill-fated 737 Max 8's MCAS system, which overrode the pilot's climb ability when they needed it most.
Not having power when you need it to safely avoid an accident will cost lives.
But, just as with self-driving cars, more lives will probably be saved, overall, by the system. Because humans, on average, aren't great drivers; computers can, or soon will be able to, outperform them.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
"Likewise, your freedom to quiet, peaceful, unpolluted cities with high-quality pavements and good bike routes contradicts my freedom to a hustle-bustle, high-GDP, high-income and high-tech economic powerhouse city."
Yes, indeed. I was in Amsterdam a couple of weeks, and I was really struck by the poverty, by the total lack of development, and complete lack of technology. Lets not head in that direction.
Of course, none of that is true. Having a high-quality pavements and good bike routes help to enable high-income, high quality of living environments, rather than contradict it. Cities have become noisy, polluted, unpleasant environments because we chose to make them that way, not because it is a necessary part of their function.
"How about you stop trying to spin your selfish desires as "MUH FREE-DUMBS"?"
Indeed, I was just responding to the idea that speed limiters are "anti-freedom". This is not a question about freedom, it's a question about what sort of place we want to live in. We've followed an urbanisation model for many years that more cars makes better cities. That was wrong and it is time that we changed it.
I think that argument cuts both ways to be honest. People who want to commute long distances tend to pretty vocal about societies providing them with good roads, about having parking spaces in the other end, and asking the people in between to put up with the pollution, the noise and the risk of death that they cause.
It is also important to remember that people don't always have great choices here either.
When I bought my house, I bought one on the bus line (as shitty as it is), only a 15 minute (or so) bus ride to work downtown. Great, right? My wife's employer is ALSO only a 15 minute (or so) bus ride to work downtown. Even better, right?
Fast forward two years. That employer now tells me that I am working out of an office 30 minutes away (best case) by car, way out in the sticks somewhere, and I can like it or lump it.
So, what, I'm just going to quit my fucking job? Or maybe my can sell one house, buy another house close to the new office, and my wife can quit HER fucking job, since she still works downtown! Or maybe I can just keep the job long enough to find a new job downtown - however long that takes. But in the meantime, I still have to get to work!
Hey, and you want to guess why the employer moved the office out of downtown and way out into the sticks somewhere? Because rents in the city are a lot more expensive. Who'd a thunked it??
As a side note, I routinely find myself going 80 mph+ on the highway with a posted limit of 55 mph. Fuck speed limiter devices.
I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city...
Name ONE, anywhere on planet Earth.
Be sure to include your definitions of "city", "quiet" and "peaceful".
"No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far."
Your freedom to go where and when you want, unfortunately, contradicts my freedom to go how I want. I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city, with high quality pavements and good bike routes for long distances.
My car and your bike are not mutually exclusive. Maybe they are if you want to ride around without any consideration for what everyone wants to do, but if you are only concerned with what you want and not anyone else then you can go fuck yourself really,
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Remember Germany? The country that pretty much dictates what goes in the EU?
The country (and as far as I know the only one in the EU, if not the world) that has no speed limit because even 130km/h (about 90mph) isn't fast enough? And where the mere suggestion of a speed limit is irresponsible and against sanity and reason,even for their politicians?
Yeah. That's gonna work out. I can see that. Uhhuh.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Excuse me? You're saying rural people are more polluting than cities?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
If you've been to Australia there are farms hundreds of kilometres from the nearest city. We just don't assume that their needs should dictate the transport infrastructure of the entire nation.
If a car is overtaking a lorry on a motorway and enters a lower speed-limit area, the driver can push down hard on the accelerator to complete the maneuver.
So the car suddenly slows down if it enters speed limit area? That means if you are switching lanes for example you could accidently ram into the next car because of this. This is just a disaster waiting to happen. Any computer controlled movements that can take place at random times are just dangerous.
Secondly if you have an emergency then this means you can't drive over the speed limit and someone could possibly die before reaching the hospital.
This is bad.
"No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far."
Your freedom to go where and when you want, unfortunately, contradicts my freedom to go how I want. I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city, with high quality pavements and good bike routes for long distances.
My car and your bike are not mutually exclusive. Maybe they are if you want to ride around without any consideration for what everyone wants to do, but if you are only concerned with what you want and not anyone else then you can go fuck yourself really,
You're the snowflake who opined rather self-importantly that your FREE-DUMBS are more important than other peoples freedoms.
If your freedom from city life is so fucking important to you, move out of the damn city. Your freedom to swing your fist end where everyone else's nose begins.
What do cities have to do with anything? Seeing as you don't seem to be willing to share, why don't you move to the countryside where no one can bother you and you can keep your impotent rage going forever.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
foreced to buy the map service or is it free?
One foot on the brake and one on the gas, hey!
Well, there's too much traffic, I can't pass, no!
So I tried my best illegal move
Well, baby, black and white come and touched my groove again!
Gonna write me up a 125
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55! Oh No!
Uh!
So I signed my name on number 24, hey!
Yeah the judge said, "Boy, just one more...
We're gonna throw your ass in the city joint"
Looked me in the eye, said, "You get my point?"
I said Yea!, Oh yea!
Write me up a 125
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55!
Oh, yea!
I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
I can't drive 55!
Uh!
When I drive that slow, you know it's hard to steer.
And I can't get get my care out of second gear.
What used to take two hours now takes all day. Huh!
It took me 16 hours to get to L.A.
Gonna write me up a 125
Post my face wanted dead or alive
Take my license, all that jive
I can't drive 55!
No, no no,
I can't drive...
(I can't drive 55!)
I can't drive...
(I can't drive 55!)
I can't drive 55!
"No, it's being able to go where and when you want. If you're stuck on foot or relying on others you're not going to get far."
Your freedom to go where and when you want, unfortunately, contradicts my freedom to go how I want. I'd like to have a quiet, peaceful, unpolluted city, with high quality pavements and good bike routes for long distances.
My car and your bike are not mutually exclusive. Maybe they are if you want to ride around without any consideration for what everyone wants to do, but if you are only concerned with what you want and not anyone else then you can go fuck yourself really,
You're the snowflake who opined rather self-importantly that your FREE-DUMBS are more important than other peoples freedoms.
If your freedom from city life is so fucking important to you, move out of the damn city. Your freedom to swing your fist end where everyone else's nose begins.
What do cities have to do with anything? Seeing as you don't seem to be willing to share, why don't you move to the countryside where no one can bother you and you can keep your impotent rage going forever.
Why? I'm not the one bothered by what other people are doing. You are, so how about you get out of their faces instead of insisting that their currently legal behaviour must be made illegal.
If you can't live iwth other people without telling them how to live, perhaps you shouldn't live with them then.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I'm sorry have I posted a bunch of rants about how people with cars should leave cities to be a utopia for bike pricks? You seem to be very bothered that people have the audacity to drive around in cities. All I said was the ability to travel is a a good metric for freedom as it lets you go further, quicker and gives you more options. I never said you can't ride your bike or suggested the be excluded from anywhere or told anyone to do/not do anything. You go ask any kid itching to get their first car and ask them what it means to them then offer them a bike instead and see how that goes.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Now the BEV cars are beating the pants off the ICE cars in acceleration. It won't be long before they beat them in every category. With such low center of gravity, BEVs will be impossible to beat. Right now Tesla is plagued with production hell, delivery hell, service hell and self induced shoot-my-feet-with-tweets hell... But the other super car makers are on hot pursuit. Already there are 4000 HP cars with 4 motors, one for each wheel, each with 1000 HP are being casually talked about.
Strong suspension, and souped up brakes are available for on the market. Easily added to BEVs. Torque being controlled to each wheel electronically, and with instant response from the motors to those electronic controls, BEVs using torque vectoring, there are things the ICEV can never do.
The BMWs and Porches cried uncle, and the government concern trolls about safety and calls off the game...
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
And why shouldn't they? What gives you the right to drive recklessly and endanger my life?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I'm sorry have I posted a bunch of rants about how people with cars should leave cities to be a utopia for bike pricks? You seem to be very bothered that people have the audacity to drive around in cities. All I said was the ability to travel is a a good metric for freedom as it lets you go further, quicker and gives you more options. I never said you can't ride your bike or suggested the be excluded from anywhere or told anyone to do/not do anything. You go ask any kid itching to get their first car and ask them what it means to them then offer them a bike instead and see how that goes.
We appear to be in violent agreement.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Looks like it's time to start buying cars in the US to import and sell in Europe. I'm guessing that you could get a nice premium for an unlocked american car as long as it meets all the other EU standards, such as stop/tail light colors.
I think I'll wait for the next models, I've heard they will have Personal Commuting Integration (PCI).
#DeleteFacebook
https://youtu.be/1EMqd5Nznv0?t...
#DeleteFacebook
Your employer wanted to reduce costs, both by reducing rent and induced attrition. They were trying to get you to quit.
As with “gun-control” legislation, less-than-honest politicians (in the EU and the UK) have cynically, quietly excused themselves from compliance.
Not surprisingly, vehicles transporting politicians (in the UK and the EU) will never have ISA installed.
It’s good enough for us, but apparently not for them.
Shocking, isn’t it, that politicians themselves are evidently hesitant about personally enjoying all the endlessly-ballyhooed “benefits” of this new, mandatory technology.
Could it be that they don’t trust this dubious kit any more than the rest of us do?
But of course, their lives and safety are “important.”
Ours apparently less so.
Yeah. That must be it. Since no one did.
Strict speed limits were set for all moving bodies in 1905, no need to override it with an european law, thank you!
Memes! Yes folks, the true danger to people isn't driving too fast, it is people using a picture of E.T. with a silly caption. Enough of a threat to humanity that the EU needs to eliminate it.
https://www.theinquirer.net/in...
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Who needs completely self driving cars when you can just have a robot back seat driver telling you what to do? "Turn left. Avoid pedestrian on right. Stop at stop sign. Slow down. I'm telling the cops about what you just did." Much more cost-effective.
Unless we won't have roads anymore....
Not necessarily. An alternative approach would be to simply not build any more roads and then, by about 2050 Europe will probably have reached terminal gridlock. Traffic congestion is already credited with reducing some fatalities.
The carbon footprint of those living in cities is, in general, lower in western nations.
Really? I hope you're adding in the extra "footprint" of trucking in all that food that is produced in rural areas.
I also hope you're adding in the extra "footprint" of all the resource development happening in non-cities that make cities possible.
Rural areas and people can survive just fine without cities. Cities and people living there can't survive without rural areas. Given this truism, which is the more "natural" way to live?
The lizard people flying the black helicopters and on their way to examine your colon, of course.
Guess what, EU and car manufacturers are not going to pay for all these new obligatory systems!
It is risk taking behavior, that has gotten the modern world to the advanced state it is in today.
Trying to always stay safe, stifles progress and innovation.
Not to mention, that life is boring without any risk.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
If you're in US, yes. Quit your job and get another. It's never been a better job seeker's market in lifetimes of those alive and of working age today.
So you want a city cleansed of disgusting human life that generates all those things as a necessity of just surviving?
We are? Last I checked, dissatisfaction with EU establishment is at all time high around the Union. To the point where normally "keep calm and pretend public is irrelevant" EU bureaucrats are openly voicing concerns that next MEP elections will upend the ability of EU to pass any meaningful directives through the Parliament.
By this logic, suicidal people aren't wrong, because they are also a [portion of population].
Just existing doesn't make one right in one's actions.
You know that when you drive faster in Germany than 130 KMH, the insurance will not cover you. Even if it is legal to do so in some places.
That makes way too much sense. There really is almost never any practical reason to drive faster than that so it probably should require a special insurance rider (with a large fee of course) and a good explanation if you wish to drive faster. The only exception I can think of is for first responders in an emergency - an ambulance should have no fixed limit if you get what I'm saying. It always puzzles me when car companies make cars that can drive 300kph or some other ridiculous speed that nobody either can or should actually reach on any public road. Honestly I'd be fine with a hard limit of 130kph or similar for any car on a public road.
We practice, practice, practice!
The only way to stop a bad guy with a speeding car, is a good guy with a speeding car.
Lets for a moment ignore the fact that speed is not THE cause of most road fatalities
Actually it is but not in the way you are probably thinking. My grandfather once pointed out to me a logically airtight fact. If you are the vehicle operator of a vehicle that causes any accident there is one inescapable truth in every case - you were driving too fast for the conditions. Those conditions include the mental state of the vehicle operator as well as weather, traffic, and the rest. This is always true even when other factors are in play as well (which there often are). If you hit something unintentionally at any speed (even at 1kph), it is ALWAYS true that you were driving too fast for the conditions. Sometimes the only safe speed is 0. If you are drunk any you hit something, being drunk is obviously causal but equally true is the fact that you were driving too fast for the conditions. You should have not moved the vehicle. You cannot hit something if you are not moving. A vehicle moving sufficiently slowly (possibly 0kph) by definition cannot cause a fatality.
Bear in mind that police can issue tickets for reckless driving at speeds well below the legal limit for a given stretch of road if the conditions warrant. Speed limits only apply when conditions are "normal". Once something changes "normal" (weather, impairment, distraction, disability, etc) then speed absolutely becomes a consideration.
Maybe the rational approach is to realize there is no one-size-fits-all solution; a transport infrastructure designed for cities won't work in rural areas, and unimproved roads in rural areas doesn't work in cities. You need both, where appropriate.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The Netherlands have a GNP per capita with the US. Amsterdam - and the Randstad region in general - is quite an economic powerhouse. Rotterdam is the largest or second largest port in Europe, too.
Also, the Netherlands score far higher on most measures of life expectancy and satisfaction. One important part is the livable cities.
14 minute Neil Peart solo begins
Decentralization: the brief interval between the decline of one centralized regime and rise of another.
And then the car won't even start, and gives you a message to have it towed to your nearest dealer to get these things fixed.
It is risk taking behavior, that has gotten the modern world to the advanced state it is in today.
You mean the state in which climate change threatens all civilizations on the planet? Don't worry, we'll fix it in post
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Just because your top speed is hard-limited by software doesn't mean your rate of acceleration is limited, you'll still have all the horsepower you need, and by the way how many day-to-day circumstances require you to be able to go faster than 122mph? Here in the U.S. anyway anything over 100mph, so far as I remember, is a felony, and the vast majority of drivers wouldn't be able to properly handle a vehicle going that fast anyway.
Besides which, as I've stated previously: there'll be aftermarket work-arounds for all this almost simultaneously with the cars hitting the roads. People who really want to give this law a big middle finger will do it anyway. Even the so-called 'black box' will have a work-around to prevent detection of what they're doing.
Over the next 20 years, if this is done.
To put that in perspective, there are rather more than 1.4M injuries (not necessarily serious) resulting from auto accidents in the EU per year right now.
Doing a bit of math, we see that this new technology will reduce the injury rate by 0.5%.
I'm skeptical that this is going to be worthwhile, given that the reduction in injuries is going to be down there in the noise level, or just barely detectable....
I'm also curious whether the police and emergency services are going to be required to be so limited. Or is this change just meant for the riff-raff?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Relative to population (it's relatively small on a global scale), Amsterdam is indeed an economic powerhouse.
Yeah, a little better than Pittsburgh and less than Portland.
Just another day in Paradise
Currently, the accelerator pedal usually has a continuous effect - press a little deeper and you get a little more oomph, press more deeper and you get a lot more oomph (unless you are too low on the revs). That is very easy for the brain to grok, predict and modulate.
I don't think that it is a good idea to make this a non-continuous effect. Press a bit and you get oomph up to a limit (that is non-intuitive unless you watch the speedometer all the time instead of watching the traffic). Press a little deeper and you get nothing, press even deeper and you get nothing. Press even more deeper and suddenly you get more oomph again. Not intuitive to modulate.
Once the self-driving car problem is solved and is a reality, the whole driving experience will be taken away from the human driver and handed over to the computer. At that point, being able to speed will be just one of the things you'll no longer be making decisions on.
Speeding will become a thing of the past.
Traffic jams will become a thing of the past.
Vehicle accidents and fatalities will drop to near zero.
DUI / DWI will become a thing of the past.
You'll no longer be a " driver ". You'll simply be a passenger. Hell, you may not even own the car.
To force everyone into a self-driving solution, insurance costs will be so high for a non-self driving car that only the .01% will be able to afford one.
( Assuming they're even allowed to drive on the same roads as the self-drive varieties at all. Eg: Off road vehicles only )
on the Autobahn.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Here the city is growing and the country have pretty high immigration. The politicians rebuild city rows into thinner ones and close some and Sweden has been in the forefront of building roads for safety and deaths happen much less here than in the US even though we import Orcs.
Anyway that of course make traffic flow worse resulting in more queues, wasted time and pollution. Sure some tragic may change routes lowering the traffic in some spaces but then you get longer routes and still more time wasted and more pollution.
As for what it's used for except one small Street in the city like 150 meters which they painted pink once and green another time with giant popcorns as art installation I haven't noticed anything. Of course some place may have gotten bidirectional bicycle lanes on both sides or just one rather than two lanes of road to pass at a pedestrian crossing but nothing really changing.
In the city they have built houses in what used to be parkings near parks, green spaces, open spaces and one large area gifted by a person for the recreation of the citizens will also be used to build houses as well as possibly an old event park where they use to have dancing and concerts.
So none of that "for the people" things have happened. Parks and forests are destroyed and shrunk and roads are made worse but with no gains from it.
If they actually remade the roads to prestige bicycle and pedestrian roads with no nasty ass busses and green spaces then I would be somewhat ok with it because it would also increase quality of life but as is it just make things worse for those who use a car just to make that worse unlikely with any understanding of the consequences (I doubt many more take the bus now.)
Maybe the war will come. Maybe not.
The loss of control happens before it.
*laughs in aftermarket ECU*
Yes. I should make my career decisions based on other peoples' disapproval of my transportation arrangements. That seems reasonable.
Print a small 140 Km/h sign
stick it in front of camera
profit
Once the self-driving car problem is solved and is a reality...Speeding will become a thing of the past. Traffic jams will become a thing of the past. Vehicle accidents and fatalities will drop to near zero. DUI / DWI will become a thing of the past.
...
...and yet, mental illness will continue.
Because they think socialism is good for them.
To force everyone into a self-driving solution, insurance costs will be so high for a non-self driving car that only the .01% will be able to afford one.
Your insurance charges are calculated directly from risk, because that is WTF insurance is. Why do people keep parroting this nonsense?
love is just extroverted narcissism
"so no one really calls me a pussy."
pussy
Says the anonymous coward.....
So you don't travel anywhere at all except to work?
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
It's not that simple. 160 km/h is just fine on a highway in an optimal state of maintenance, under otherwise optimal circumstances: weather, traffic, angle of the sun, hours of restorative sleep, recent sugar intake, condition of tires on vehicle and all around general mechanical soundness, no giant trucks shedding part of their loads, no giant piles of leaves migrating to the opposite bank without using a marked crosswalk, etc. etc.
Long, long ago I crossed much of Canada on my motorcycle at a typical cruising speed around 145 km/h—a speed where my bike absolutely purred along—completely aware that at every minute of every hour I was one short, inattentive moment away from becoming a giant road pizza. (Consequently, I had very very few inattentive moments, and I was aware of every vehicle in my viable light-cone of paint exchange, 360 degrees, at all times.
Much of the trans-Canada wasn't even divided at that point, especially in the prairies, so you're often undertaking passing manoeuvres in the oncoming lane with extra haste, despite multiple miles of forward visibility; I very patiently awaited my main chance, and then lowered the boom, dropping a gear down and spiking up to 90% of red line as I hit the gap hard; there's a brief wind-waggle as you come hard around the ass-end of a big rig, which doesn't much change your vector (if you ignore the effect, as you should), but it does slam you into ten degrees of sideways tilt before you bounce upright again half a second later; not quite Yeager punching through Mach 1, but as close as I ever got).
This was entirely unlike some of the grocery-getters who were drafting along behind the big rig, completely unaware they were riding a giant wave, then they try to punch out into the passing lane at half throttle, and almost fall back once the hit the brunt of the wind, before they finally get religion about the throttle, by which point their passing manoeuvre—if they stick it out—has stretched out to 15 to 20 long seconds, by which point the halfway-panicked driver is struggling to figure out whether that oncoming car in the far distance is less than a full mile, which is darn hard to do—though, unfortunately, it won't be at all hard to do by the time the the struggling grocery-getting pulls even with the big rig's powerful hindquarters, not if he's misjudged this treacle adventure the least bit. Good work, Sherlock. You can punch the brakes, drop back 30 m in a heart beat, and tuck back in behind the big truck—supposing he's not also so jumpy by now he punches his brakes at the same time, thinking he's giving you a necessary out in the forward direction. Compared to this kind of thing, my three-second power surges well north of 145 km/h seemed like a giant oasis of unadulterated prudence.
Never once did I leave a big rig speculating nervously about whether I had competently managed this business of darting in/out of the oncoming lane. Not only that, I tended to start these manoeuvres from 3 seconds back, beginning my hard acceleration still safely tucked in my own lane, on an inside line, perfectly timed to hit the open gap behind the oncoming car, at speed, hard off the ass-end of the truck ahead, the precise moment the maw opens up. This involves solving (simple) differential equations in three dimensions simultaneously: where (right off the ass-end of the truck in front), when (the precise moment the maw opens up), and how fast (a lot honking faster than the truck ahead)—all have to perfectly align at a single moment in time (though there is some rubber in the "honking fast" constraint, with leeway up or down, to absorb minor miscalculation).
Point of view from the big rig: oncoming car on undivided highway blows past on the left; 500 ms later, motorcycle pops out ti
The most important part of a car (the tires) are MUCH better. The physics haven't changed, but the Engineering has.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yes, well, I come up with a clear counter example to your statement. And then you say, "ah well, that doesn't count because of something else that I have just thought of".
There are many cities that have started to put in more enlightened transport policies that more cars, going faster, killing more people. In answer to your question "how small is my world", well, the bit that I live in at any one time is probably about the same size as yours.
"It is also important to remember that people don't always have great choices here either."
Yes, indeed. Some countries have been good at ensuring that people have choices; others have just gone the car route.
"That employer now tells me that I am working out of an office 30 minutes away (best case) by car, way out in the sticks somewhere, and I can like it or lump it."
Or expect a reasonable redundancy package; at least that would be how it would be in a country with sensible employment rights.
"As a side note, I routinely find myself going 80 mph+ on the highway with a posted limit of 55 mph. Fuck speed limiter devices."
If you crash, with luck you will survive or kill only yourself.
What job your wife has? Watch out for the vice squad.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Amsterdam and the entire Netherlands is the best example, of course. Copenhagen is very human-transport friendly. Barcelona is taking very radical strides with its superblock structure. London is trying. A bit. With patchy success.
In the US, there are no real beacons, but some cities are better than others. San Francisco, Portland, for example. On the East Coast, Boston in parts, and some of New York could be given the low rates of car ownership. But, yes, there is a long way to go here.
In terms of pollution, China is electrifying its entire bus fleet and adding more. Even in India, cities are converting their Tuk-Tuks to LPG and electric.
I know this is slashdot but is it too much to ask to at least read the summary:
The system can be overridden temporarily. If a car is overtaking a lorry on a motorway and enters a lower speed-limit area, the driver can push down hard on the accelerator to complete the maneuver.
So you have the power when you need it. Just hit the accelerator to the bottom and it will bypass the limit.
Next EU law: website will make it impossible to comment without having read the corresponding article.
What sig ?
You really don't know what you are talking about.
Tires are much better, to the point that you can damage an old car by putting modern tires on it. The loads generated can break the old suspension.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Skoda and probably the entire VW group also have most of this technology in their more expensive cards: lane guidance, traffic sign detection, assistive cruise control which automatically keeps distance and warms in case of crash risk. The navigation also shows speed limits. It's just not linked to a limiter yet.
Your not my lawyer. Fuckoff.
FYI my last 'ticket' was decades ago. My lawyer got it dismissed as a 'defective speedometer' fix it ticket. 110 in a 25. You should have seen the cops face.
It was expensive, DAs aren't cheap.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'