Thorny_Thicket @ Thorny_Thicket @sopuli.xyz

Exploring diverse perspectives on contentious subjects.

---

Read more

Posts

7

Comments

847

Joined

2 yr. ago

That third option is the first option in my view.

For the sake of an argument let's imagine that most people drive 10kph over the speedlimit on highways and statistically a significant number of accidents happens when people are overtaking someone driving slower.

Now by driving faster these dangerous overtakes happen way less often and it results in overall increase in safety but it's also against the rules so how does your "third option" solve this issue?

Finland

If you've done this kind of stuff for living for the past 30 years then I'm sure you can give me a better explanation than "that's not how it works"

I refuse to buy a phone without a headphone jack but in my experience wired earbuds last about 9 months while my cheap JBL 110bt bluetooth buds are still going strong after more than 5 years of almost daily use. The battery still lasts about 7 hours.

For dead tech they sure do sell a shit ton of dongles

If one truly cares about features such as headphone jack, removable battery, expandable memory etc. I'd argue Samsung Galaxy XCover 6 Pro is the best smartphone on earth.

Not clickbait except I have no idea what phone is in question unless I click

Vähän erikoiselta toi kuulostaa kun ei 4G:täkään tunnu löytyvän joka paikassa. 5G:stä nyt on turha haaveillakaan keskustojen ulkopuolella.

Typical house is around 200 to 500k€. Mine was just 100k because I settled for a smaller one.

Even if self driving car behaves like a human driver it still exceeds humans thousandfold in processing and reaction speed. For a truly advanced self driving system plowing thru stop signs and speeding should be non-issue because unlike humans it can pay 100% attention to its surroundings 100% of the time and react instantly when needed.

If FSD is trained from billions of hours of video data then it by definition drives like an average driver and thus is highly predictable.

That depends on what you value.

If you want self driving cars that follow traffic rules to the letter even if that means more people are going to die then that's fine. I don't agree but I can see why someone would think that. Personally I would prioritize human life so if it turns out this is one of the cases when bending the rules does in fact lead to less accidents then that's what I'm voting for.

I'm not claiming either is true. Just asking to consider the fact that the right thing to do is not always intuitive.

Perhaps you should put your hatred towards Elon aside for a while and objectively consider what actually is the better solution here.

One could argue that strictly following the rules is the right approach, and perhaps it would be if everyone actually drove that way. However, in reality, that's not usually the case. What truly increases traffic safety is predictability. If most drivers are rolling through stop signs and you're the only one stopping completely, while you might technically be in the right, your behaviour could lead to accidents due to the unpredictability. The same applies to speeding. Driving significantly slower than the flow of traffic might slow down the traffic flow, leading to unsafe overtakings and such. While you might be legally correct here too, in practice, a slight increase in speed could lead to increased road safety.

These are complex issues. A dose of humility might go a long way instead of acting like the answer is obvious.

AI DRIVR made an interesting analysis about the v12 on YouTube. Apparently it's completely different from the previous versions and instead of understanding traffic rules it learns from a videos of people driving which means it does things like doesn't fully stop at stop signs and drives over the speedlimit - like people do too.

It's interesting because by strictly following traffic rules you might infact be a danger to others but by driving like humans you're also breaking the law. Good example of a situation where the "right" thing to do might not be the most intuitive one though in this case it's still up for a debate.

My eFatbike is limited to 25kph/15mph after which it stops assisting. Sometimes when pedaling back home from the trails on the side of the road I meet road bikers and it takes quite a while for them to catch me and even after overtaking I'm following them for a looong time before they get out of sight. You'd think a roadbike would be much faster but it's the uphills where ebikes shine and it makes a huge difference. On flat or downhill they smoke me tho. No competition there.

Pretty crazy that you can reach 100kph downhill. My tops with the fatbike is about 63kph. That's on gravel though.

I disagree. My eFatbike has 250W mid-drive motor and is limited to 15mph and thus is considered a bicycle by law. You can drive faster than that but it stops assisting you at 15mph. In my opinion anything faster than that doesn't belong to the sidewalks and since you're now driving in traffic you should be registered and insured.

I quite often see people zooming past pedestrians on sidewalks with their surrons and modified ebikes and these assholes are what's going to ruin the fun for everyone else too. These are not bicycles - they're light electric motorbikes.

your average cyclist can sprint to over 30 mph without much trouble

Sprint yeah but unlike ebikes they can't maintain that speed. I can basically keep up with roadbikers despite my ridicilously fat 4.8" mushy tires. They gain distance on flat and downhill and I catch them in uphill.