Hacker News Reader

Comment by mortureb | Hacker News Reader

You can say the same thing about high speed trains now. The difference is, a well set up automated system is probably the best odds a kid is going to get at survival because if all the cars are networked they will know ahead of time there is someone rapidly braking ahead of them.

View on HN

The kid doesn't give a damn if the cars behind the car that's about to hit them are braking. All that matters is whether that first car is able to brake fast enough to avoid hitting them, or if not, whether the car has slowed sufficiently to maybe not kill them. If networked autonomous cars are moving faster, the kid is much less likely to survive. Period.

Maybe the car detects the kid earlier. But that's not guaranteed; if the kid runs out from between two parked cars, for example, there may not be sufficient time at higher speeds for the car to stop.

This is a huge problem with human drivers today. Get rid of on street parking then you won’t have kids just popping out of nowhere! It holds for pedestrians just trying to cross the street, no need to have a hypothetical kid chasing a ball, it’s already a problem.

Absolutely, but networked autonomous vehicles moving faster so as to increase traffic flow like the parent mentioned would only make the problem worse.

People behave unpredictably. Hell, even when they behave predictably and cross at the crosswalk when they’re supposed to, they can still get hit by cars.

That said, on-street parking does have the benefit of placing a multi-ton shield between traffic and pedestrians and cyclists. Slower speeds and better street design can at least lessen the likelihood of fatal accidents when people pop out between parked cars.

I don’t think any road that has kids playing shouldn’t have a fast speed limit. And any road with faster traffic should have no street parking at all, better visibility from the sidewalk, and probably some separation (deeper curbs?). This is regardless of whether AI or people are driving.

Slower speeds work for sure, but getting a robo taxi to adhere to those slower speeds is much more realistic than getting a human driver to do the same.

Road design sends signals to drivers: wide lanes and other design choices make a road less cognitively stressful, and so you speed up. It feels like you should be able to move a bit faster, and so you do. If the posted speed limit doesn't feel right, drivers will ignore it.

The answer is to take that into account with traffic calming measures[0] that alter the street design and make it more stressful for drivers. Narrower lanes, big trees overhanging the street, small traffic circles, pinchpoints, and other measures making driving fast very uncomfortable. You feel like you need to pay more attention, and drivers naturally slow down as a result.

0. https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-...

The Dutch have figured this out, there are plenty of things you can do to make roads better and safer for pedestrians, we just don't do that here in the USA. It is just that, if drivers could be controlled, you could focus on more pedestrian/bike safety and expect cars not to go too fast (assuming all cars were self driving, which won't happen for a long time in the states at least).

I think you’re imagining a system with no real-world engineering difficulties, and then presuming everyone else is also imagining it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com