This type of thinking would do humanity a lot of good if applied to cars & rules of the road. In my opinion using a public resource (roads) you should be compelled to follow the rules
- Speed Limits
- Stop Signs
- ...
- Speed Limits
- Stop Signs
- ...
"Can we make sure that if you’re going down a sidewalk and you’re going bump bump bump because you hit everything on the sidewalk — that the scooter knows you’re on a sidewalk and really compels you get off the sidewalk," Ward said.
It would be interesting to apply this technology to cars, as well. Driving or parking in the bus lane or bike lane? "Really compel the driver to get out of that lane." Speeding in a school zone? "Really compel the driver to slow down." It would be nice if public transportation was faster (the point of bus lanes) and if kids could get to school without being mowed down by speeding cars. A much bigger problem than scooters, however annoying they may be on boardwalks.
We have played with such technology in NYC from time to time. One state Senator's vehicle has been caught going 36+ mph in a 25mph school zone 10 times and the same Senator is responsible for renewing the speed camera trials. Needless to say, he is opposed and the state Senate took no action:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/nyregion/marty-golden-sch...
This article ended up making the state Senate look so bad that the Governor apparently unilaterally extended the "trial" of the speed cameras, so maybe progress is being made. It still tends to be widely opposed by those in power (police officers are the other loudest anti-advocates); people do not like perfect enforcement of laws that they can't weasel their way out of with "do you know who I am!?" It's unfortunate.
Yeah maybe we could reduce accidents by 0.1% or whatever. But you just know the damn thing will go on the fritz at some point or gps will be wrong and you’ll be going too slow somewhere else, or you’ll be a rush in an emergency and be unable to get where you’re going...plus (and this May be unpopular) that world just sounds boring and crappy. I don’t want my life controlled by the cloud.
Yeah. The top of a slippery slope that ends in skateboard insurance, bicycle licesnes the DOT setting up stings to catch overweight wheelbarrows. No thanks. The level of regulation that applies to mopeds is too damn high. The last thing I want is a precedent for regulating even smaller things.
15 - 20mph is a pretty significant speed limit. At that speed a car - pedestrian collision is highly unlikely to be fatal. Much faster and the chances of a fatality increase quickly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero
I would really like to see 20mph speed limits become much more common and strictly enforced. There's no reason we need to risk killing people just to get someplace faster.
Many speed limits are unreasonably low.
Many stop signs should really be yield signs.
Re: I-270 Maryland
http://www.mikeontraffic.com/85th-percentile-speed-explained...
Portland is going through this right now. Dropped the speed limits on all the former 25 mph roads to 20 mph. The result is predictable. If the city wanted people to slow down on the small surface streets, they should make them narrow enough that it's somewhat challenging to fit two cars on side by side. Works every time, needs no more enforcement to make it work.
Vision Zero Principles, as stated in the linked Wikipedia article:
Vision Zero is based on an underlying ethical principle that "it can never be ethically acceptable that people are killed or seriously injured when moving within the road transport system." As an ethics-based approach, Vision Zero functions to guide strategy selection and not to set particular goals or targets. In most road transport systems, road users bear complete responsibility for safety. Vision Zero changes this relationship by emphasizing that responsibility is shared by transportation system designers and road users.
This is the part I don't agree with. What makes it unethical that people die while choosing to participate in a somewhat dangerous activity? Sure, we could halve all of the speed limits and put speed cameras everywhere. We could also force people to wear face helmets and kneepads when riding their bike, and wear a life jacket while swimming. But I don't think we should do any of those things since people should have the freedom to take reasonable risks.
Using the streets and sidewalks to get to work and/or school is not an optional activity for most people.
Speed increases the severity of accidents.
Decreasing the probability while increasing the severity may not provide any benefits.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/josh-barro-democrats-...
-- we'll never get the political support we need to solve them.
The leading cause of death for young people in many jurisdictions is not a tiny probability.
Moving towards zero deaths from road way transportation seems like a worthly goal
I think raising the barrier to get a driving license would be much more effective in reducing MVAs.
Judges throw certain speeding tickets out of court for being unreasonable. (Speed limit too low, fine too high.)
One of the jurisdictions local to me makes the yellow light 4 to 5 seconds long, depending on road speed, and puts a 2 or 3 second delay after one light goes red before the opposing signal goes green. They have no red light cameras for enforcement.
Another jurisdiction, adjacent to the first, has lowered their yellow light timing below 4 seconds, sometimes lowering it to the point where it takes as long to go across some intersections as the length of the time is yellow, assuming you are at the speed limit. They love red light cameras.
Until we remove the monetary incentive from enforcement, we have no business further automating it. Use points, remedial training, reduction in driving privileges, whatever, but the incentives currently benefit those who make the rules, and the result is not safer roads.
Unfortunately, assurances from lawmakers and police are worthless unless they're written into the law. No matter what they might say, you're still open to legal liability for going even 1 MPH over the posted limit. Worse, this attitude makes the problem more difficult to fix—once they get everyone used to going 10-15 MPH over the posted limits they can't very well update the signs with the real speeds since that would lead people to think they can go 10-15 MPH over what the new signs say.
Selective enforcement results in injustice. Any law which is routinely broken without penalty should be considered null and void. Either set the limits properly and enforce them strictly, or do away with them entirely.