Hacker News Reader

Comment by sandworm101 | Hacker News Reader

It is one thing to note that humans regularly break the law. It is another thing to task people with programing a robot to break that law. I'm very sure that many people break the speed limit regularly. But I would never expect to get away with programing a car to break that limit. No sane person would ever tell an employee or customer that rolling stops are OK, not in writing.

And 5.6mph isn't rolling. That's beyond a walking pace. That's jogging territory. Any cop watching an intersection would ticket this.

View on HN

I fully support the noble notions and idealistic ideas.

But let's make it real, and let's ask a question about the real world:

Does that mean that expectation is all automated cars will go exactly the speed limit on the left lane of North American superhighways?

If so, those cars will inherently be a danger to life and limb. I don't care about any self-righteous driver who indicates houghtily "I drive speed limit on left lane of American super highway", I've spoken to advanced driver safety instructors, highway police officers and city councilors who all agree those people need to bloody well move it along - it's just not safe.

Yes. For a company to program illegality into a product opens them up to untold liability. Normal car companies program their speedometers to read slightly high (5% ish). This keeps them from being into lawsuits by people who claim that an inaccurate speedometer contributed to the severity of a crash. Any car company who programs a car to drive faster than the limit will be either liable or have to pay lawyers in every crash involving such cars. Even if their car doesn't cause the crash, the fact that it was speeding will contribute to the severity of the accident. It would be like programing a robotic bartender to serve kids who are underage but look old enough to pass for 21. Corporate lunacy.

>Yes. For a company to program illegality into a product opens them up to untold liability.

People have been saying this for years yet Tesla is not being sued into nonexistence. Presumably their contracts are written well enough that if the user tells the car to go above the speed limit that's on them.

Because incidents involving these programs are very small. At the moment there are very few Teslas on the road in comparison to other car companies. There would statistically only be a handful at most of such accidents. But give it a few years until there are 10x or 20x as many teslas on the road. Then the class actions will start. That is if, like here, Tesla hasn't already recalled all such vehicles.

What are your odds and the amount you'd be willing to bet that this is true? There are sums of money and odds that I would be willing to play this at.

There's a difference between the driver setting the cruise control above the speed limit, and a computer unilaterally deciding that it should run a stop sign.

> Does that mean that expectation is all automated cars will go exactly the speed limit on the left lane of North American superhighways?

It’s already against road rules to stay in the passing lane when cars behind wish to pass, regardless of the speed limit, or if you’re already driving at it. If cars behind desire to overtake, give way. This is already codified. No need to blame the cars or the self-driving tech. It’s the human driver who bears responsibility for what the car does or doesn’t do, as are the only ones able to countermand the autopilot. Blaming Tesla for any of that seems like dogpiling and behind the point.

That depends on the jurisdiction. In my state (MA), I can use the left lane while passing other traffic even if there is traffic behind me who wishes to go faster than I am.

I don’t think that is contrary to my point or what I was trying to say. The left lane is for passing cars in the right lane, and for turning left across traffic in cases with no middle turning lane. The left lane is not meant for driving. I don’t think this varies by jurisdiction and may not be a regulation per se, it’s just the norms and rules of the road.

Not in California. Left lane fast, right lane slow isn't the law, and you can pass in whatever lane you'd like.

Studies show that, adjusted for congestion and weather, SF Bay Area drivers have some of the highest accidents per mile in the country.

> Not in California. Left lane fast, right lane slow isn't the law, and you can pass in whatever lane you'd like.

That sounds really unsafe and surely must make driving much more stressful than it needs to be.

Seriously? That feels unpredictable and stressful, whereas I feel driving should be as predictable as possible.

> Does that mean that expectation is all automated cars will go exactly the speed limit on the left lane of North American superhighways?

In the vast majority of states this would also be illegal. If Tesla decides it safe, they should be able to just rewrite the rules, though, right?

> And 5.6mph isn't rolling

Most cars idle at 5 to 6 mph, so any roll through a stop sign is likely to break the 5 mph mark.

> Any cop watching an intersection would ticket this.

Not sure where you live, but this is absolutely not the case where I am. I have only ever once heard of a traffic officer ticketing for this. On the other hand, I see cops watch on as people ignore "no turn on red" signs and let them get away with it pretty much every day. Let alone rolling through an intersection at 5 mph.

I’ve gotten a ticket before for a rolling stop. It happens.

Lol, I live in SF. I've seen two cruisers waiting at a red light watch a car go right through it and do nothing. I'm not complaining or anything, but that guy is defo wrong that cops will ticket anyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com