this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2025
605 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
76252 readers
2810 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
“It’s not the speed that kills”
Yes it is. It’s the speed and the weight.
The impact force doubles from 55 to 70. That’s a spectacular difference. Driving cars is already the most dangerous thing we do and this talk about if computers make good judgment calls or not? They make better judgment calls than humans every time.
Just because people want to speed on the road doesn’t mean we need to accept the crazy idea that it’s somehow safe for them.
Yes but if everyone is doing 70 there won’t be impacts between the cars.
Speed is also not part of force. That’s acceleration times mass. Sudden stops and starts are deadly because of acceleration, not speed.
Obviously any road where people are doing 55 shouldn’t have pedestrians or cyclists.
“Between cars”
Right it’s not like anyone ever has car trouble and the road is always free of obstacles and animals!
It’s exactly like the oil pipeline people. “It’s perfectly safe unless it leaks” but they always leak!! That’s just a fact of life!
“Any road where people are doing 55 shouldn’t have pedestrians on cyclists “
Lots of roads are 55 and have sidewalks.
Hell I got a perfect example. I know one road near the airport that’s 60 until about 100 yards from the school zone where it drops to 20 then picks back up. No one slows down. They blast 70 straight thru (people add 10mph to every posted sign around here because the cops “won’t pull you over for just going a little over”)
So my question to you… on that road what is the safe solution? Should cars slow down and risk a wreck that way? Blast thru the school crosswalk going 70? Or do we need to just close the school and move it away from all those important drivers in a hurry?
Go the speed limit. Safety laws are written in blood buddy. They exist because people kept dying.
Bad road design is an entirely different problem.
And I’ve got a question for you: it’s rush hour and everyone is doing 70 in a 55. How do you enforce this? Pull everyone over?
“Pull everyone over “
I love how you phrase that like it’s some ridiculous impossibility lol.
Speed cameras. Send them all a ticket.
“Bad road design is a different problem”
Yeah just like crashing is a different problem lol.
“It’s not my fault that orphanage was flammable! I just like playing with fireworks! They should build better orphanages.
Then why haven’t they put speed cameras everywhere?
Because a local government wouldn’t last an election cycle if they did that.
lol do you really think that’s some kind of rebuttal?
Let’s break it down. Essentially:
“We can’t ticket everyone”
“Yes we can”
“But we don’t like to get tickets so we vote against tickets. Therefore you can’t do the reasonable things leaving our solution of speeding as the only option! so check and mate!”
It’s impossible because you want to keep it impossible, so you can say it’s impossible, so your idea of just speeding all the time is the only way.
If you can find an electorate who’d be okay with this you might have a point.
Those cameras would come down in like a month, what few a local government could afford to put up, anyway.
They could do this easily on major highways and yet they haven’t yet, precisely because the local government knows it would be electoral suicide.
A better solution would be pace cars that drive the speed limit with big gates so nobody can go around them. Then people literally can’t speed.
In my town murder is perfectly fine. Every time someone tries to make a law changing that we just murder them. So murdering people is the only reasonable solution.
Btw you mentioned one of the deer and one of the car crashes. That means you are at least up to 4 on your body shop count. I once again have 0 wrecks.
You talk about shitty drivers but it’s you bro. You speed everywhere and keep getting in wrecks that’s are “totally not your fualt“
If you’re going to eat a hamburger eat the hell out of it
If you want to speed because you want to just say that. “Fuck you’re safety I’m in a hurry”
Don’t try to convince me it’s actually YOU who is the safe driver when you keep getting in wrecks.
Btw we aren’t going to waste our time pushing for more speed cameras lol we are going to sit and wait and gather our energy.
The moment self driving cars are safe enough we are going to ban human drivers entirely, because humans suck at driving cars.
That’s the future for you guys. You flat out refuse to drive safely so we just won’t let you drive at all.
Yeeees, another thing Tesla and Google can fully control in our lives! Hurray!
I never said Tesla or google. Only self driving cars. Tesla didn’t invent the concept nor do they own it.
then don’t get involved with self driving cars. Just walk, problem solved.
companies are a thing. It’s who we buy stuff from. You’re going to have to get used to that.
I've never been much of a conspiracy nut, but this is where I agree with them. I don't want government and corporations to say when and where I can go. Walking is an option for me 90% of the time, and one I take very often, but what if I literally need to fucking escape an invasion? Considering it's happening right now, 4 countries south of me, and said invader has demonstrated that they love taking down communications networks, what the fuck options am I going to have left if I need to drive 1000 km in a day and my car's like "No Internet connection, I'm staying put"? If you're in the US you don't have THAT risk, but you still have the whole issue of a dictator being able to decide where you're driving. Public transit is great, but it's not ready for mass surges of people fleeing and if someone's after you personally, it creates choke points (stations) where it's easy to grab you. I'm not saying cars are super hard to track, but when there are a lot of targets, everyone being spread out means it's harder to get a lot of people at once.
we used to have a system that broke up monopolies and with current hatred of these large businesses we will be going back to that very soon. Btw we are right now in that few choices stage. We’ll pass that by the time the tech is perfected.
lol. How dare I limit people to only: walking, biking, sailing, flying, skipping, horse/camel riding, electric scooter, electric bIke, piggy back rides, surf, skateboard, crawl, pogo stick, Tobagon, dog sled, horse carriage, astral projection…I’ve taken exactly one option away. You can’t drive yourself because it’s dangerous. You can’t eat human meat how dare they limit you to only a few options of meat! C’mon man I’m not buying that.
I don’t know, why DO we constantly give corporations more control over our lives? Why do you want to fix that by stopping something objectively good? That’s like saying you want more free speech but you’re starting with the n-word. It feels disingenuous. If you don’t want them to have that power… BUILD YOUR OWN. Btw we are currently in the step. “Lock it doors and drive yourself where you don’t want to go” that happens all the time in people driven cars as well. Maybe we should make laws against kidnapping people… oh wait it is already illegal.
People flee war zones now without the aid of cars, highways get clogged with traffic… which would be impossible if the cars drove themselves! It would be easier to evacuate people with self driving cars.
I’m not buying your arguments.
Edit: forgot a few
Trains, monorails, Zipline, parachute, Segway, subway, moving walkways… I might be back with more
I highly doubt it'll go smoothly. IMO what will happen is driving standards will rise, driving tests will become extremely tough and need to be repeated every few years, and self driving tech will get cheaper and most people will just summon cars like Waymo rather than bothering to remain liscensed. There will have to be an offramp, not a firm cutoff.
Driving isn’t going smoothly now. Nothing ever goes smoothly.
“Driving standards will rise yada yada”
Nope. We’ve already established you guys will never accept any steps to safety without throwing a fit.
It’s “go big or go home”. We’ll push hard and fast because we’ll get the same pushback regardless of how small the change. So change big.
How it’ll actually go is trucking will be taken over by automatic driving because it’s cheaper. The reduction in traffic and increase in safety will be seen and immediately we’ll push for a driving ban. You’ll probably get 3-5 years to retrofit your car or buy a knew one… then that’s it. No more dangerous drivers, no more traffic…
And yes people will probably ditch private car ownership in exchange for self driving free busses and cheap taxis.
Children will be able to walk to school safely finally.
Naw. Too many people like driving, too many emergency situations that require a human. The most that will reasonably happen is people will prefer self-driving and driving test requirements will increase somewhat.
We very rarely ban old things, we mostly just convince people to use new things.
We ban dangerous things people like all the time.
Want to know what I like? Cocaine. Lots of people loved cocaine. They banned it.
People threw a fit when they made drunk driving illegal too. They still made it illegal.
People loved asbestos as well, they banned that.
You can’t even sell milk directly from a cow in most states because of the dangers. Raw milk is banned.
People are fighting tooth in nail to try to re-legalize weed lol and it’s a huge uphill battle.
We ban old things all the time regardless of how well liked they are.
“Too many emergency situations require a human” not really as it would relate to driving… computers have much faster reflexes than a human. They will drive better. So what emergency are you thinking of? Car breaking down? Most people can’t fix thier own car anyway. The only change will be the car calling a tow truck instead of you.
You aren't on a road and the car is confused about how to move around. You are now stranded because you can't drive the car. I have yet to see any self-driving car even attempt to be reasonable in off-road driving.
Your buddy's cabin in the woods, grass parking at a venue, natural disaster and the road is gone, a country driveway, getting into your backyard with the shit your bought at home depot, etc, etc.
“Yet” - you
Let’s explain it this way.
You are driving not on the road and our confused about why you are. You are now stranded even though you are driving yourself.
See. The argument of “well the computer could get confused” people get confused all the time.
And again you said “yet” and that’s my whole point. It’s getting there. It’s only a matter of time before the computer can get to your buddies house quicker and better than you. And will probably be able to scan and avoid loose mud and snow so you don’t destroy your buddies lawn when you get stuck.
If I was that buddy of yours it would only be a matter of time before I make you park your personal driving car at the gate and walk up like how people don’t wear shoes in thier house. Don’t destroy my yard with your messy personal driving skills. Let the computer find you a place to park.
This is complete bullshit, by someone who has a fixated idea but knows nothing.
At 70 break distance is longer, time to react is shorter, and collision speeds are higher. All factors that increase danger and damage.
You might as well claim that driving 250 is perfectly safe if everybody do it.
Obviously acceleration as in negative acceleration is greater in Collisions at higher speeds. You are either a troll or a very very illogical person.
If everyone is doing 250 they won’t hit each other. But if one person is doing 125 things get a lot less safe.
The rest of it is not what I’m talking about. I am aware that all of the rest is true, but is outside of what I’m describing.
Maybe we just eliminate all transportation that can exceed walking speed. You know, for safety.
Acceleration is a derivative of velocity
Which is also a vector. Speed is a scalar.
Wow look at the brain on this one everybody
Sorry for the second reply but these kinda arguments always remind me of the joke
“No street racing should be legal. It’s completely safe! Oh not if they crash but that’s street crashing not racing. I’m very against street crashing. Racing is safe tho”
And I got to know… do you wear a seatbelt when driving? Why? Just don’t crash instead, why waste time with a seatbelt?
I know a few people who have been pulled over for driving the speed limit and making it unsafe by creating a rolling road block.
Most accidents on highways are the result of lane changes, and people not going with the flow of traffic increases lane changes.
I know a guy who got arrested for looking like another guy. Laws are often crappy. Those people you know… what’s thier accident history like? Do they crash a lot? I’m guessing not. I’ve never even come close to hitting another car in all my 20+ years of driving.
One of them is known as “Bambi killer” because they hit so many deer.
One of them? Just the one? How about you? How many deer have you hit? I’ve never hit an animal or road debris either.
You never answered if you wear your seatbelt or not.
Of course I wear my seatbelt because other people are shit drivers. Even at 35 mph I could be seriously injured if someone crosses the center line.
Because of the acceleration, not the speed.
I’ve hit two deer but one literally jumped on top of my car from a hillside and the other I hit at like 15mph.
Don’t waste your time with seatbelts. Those other driver need to learn to drive but that’s a different problem. Just don’t crash and you won’t need a seatbelt.
Would you rather be hit by a bad driver going 35 or a bad driver going 70? It’s the same right? It’s the acceleration lol