Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Strangely enough, we're perfectly able to do that in Germany. Then again, we're obviously not morons.
You can prove with a camera who was driving the car? Without having to show who was driving the car.
I'm hoping that you just have the cameras angled so they actually capture the person driving.
I already told you how it works. You seem to have the attention span of a gadfly.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Okay, you're a moron. I'm done arguing with you.
How do you prove someone wrote the right thing in a log book.
What's to stop me from writing in someone else's name.
Unless this logbook is digital and scans the driver's license and takes a picture every time you start the car, it's not very strong evidence of anything...
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
That's not a good reason to be against them though.
That's a good reason for me to be against my local government doing it.
I'm not against red-light cameras implemented properly.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
That's not a good reason to be against them though.
That's a good reason for me to be against my local government doing it.
I'm not against red-light cameras implemented properly.
That's fair.
-
@sloosecannon Yeah, I think that's the problem with @Rhywden understanding my arguments.
I can only assume that Germany is far less corrupt, and that's why there is a greater trust in the government.
Over here, trust in government is so low, that we purposefully set high requirements for charging people for crimes. To the point where we don't trust automated systems because they are easy to be tampered with.
It's super trivial to alter the color of a light in a video... compared to altering a face.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Okay, you're a moron. I'm done arguing with you.
How do you prove someone wrote the right thing in a log book.
What's to stop me from writing in someone else's name.
Unless this logbook is digital and scans the driver's license and takes a picture every time you start the car, it's not very strong evidence of anything...
Yes, you wrote someone else's name in. And suddenly this guy gets a fine. However, the guy you named is not okay with getting the fine because he didn't actually drive the car and he can prove it.
And thus you just lied to a judge which is usually frowned upon. And the amount of your fine just increased by a ten-fold and you also lost your license.
Well, damn.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Yes, you wrote someone else's name in. And suddenly this guy gets a fine. However, the guy you named is not okay with getting the fine because he didn't actually drive the car and he can prove it.
You see, you're assuming the other guy can prove it.
Now you've made it my word, his word, and you've exponentially increased the cost of the trial.
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
And thus you just lied to a judge which is usually frowned upon. And the amount of your fine just increased by a ten-fold and you also lost your license.
Well, damn.And people actually risk that.... all the time...
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
In Dallas area, nearly a third of red-light camera tickets are going unpaid
Who cares.
That's the conclusion of my interest (and involvement) in this argument. Who cares.
Some people (a minority) say "fuck the cameras, I do what I want". Same thing happens in Washington DC with both red light enforcement and (more notably) speed enforcement.
The majority of people accept the automated enforcement and repeat violations are reduced. Net effect on that locality: Positive. Amount of accidents: Reduced.
So who cares about the assholes.
-
@xaade right. I personally trust the government where I live, mainly because of their stance on these kind of issues (they don't act like idiots and generally behave for the greater good). But I have heard stories about governments who do stupid stuff too, so I understand that it can happen....
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Yes, you wrote someone else's name in. And suddenly this guy gets a fine. However, the guy you named is not okay with getting the fine because he didn't actually drive the car and he can prove it.
You see, you're assuming the other guy can prove it.
Now you've made it my word, his word, and you've exponentially increased the cost of the trial.
Yes, however, this will still result in a massive fine for you. You're SOL in either case. And since when do judges care about what the trial cost you?
Also, you're still forgetting that your insurance company also won't be happy with you.
-
@heterodox said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Amount of accidents: Reduced.
If the net outcome is the only factor to consider, how would you feel if someone demonstrated that the number of collisions increased with red light cameras?
Now you're up against @Rhywden's argument of principle about rear end collisions.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
that is the most horrific thing I've every read.
Even worse than "female pharaonic circumcision[1] is widely practiced in parts of Africa?" Nobody should ever take you seriously again.
[1] If it's not clear what that means to you, I wouldn't recommend Googling it.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Yes, however, this will still result in a massive fine for you. You're SOL in either case. And since when do judges care about what the trial cost you?
Also, you're still forgetting that your insurance company also won't be happy with you.Yeah, but in some cases, I successfully pin it on someone else who is innocent, because the judge trusted pen and paper.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@heterodox said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Amount of accidents: Reduced.
If the net outcome is the only factor to consider, how would you feel if someone demonstrated that the number of collisions increased with red light cameras?
Now you're up against @Rhywden's argument of principle about rear end collisions.
Wat.
You just got even more idiotic. Astounding.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Yes, however, this will still result in a massive fine for you. You're SOL in either case. And since when do judges care about what the trial cost you?
Also, you're still forgetting that your insurance company also won't be happy with you.Yeah, but in some cases, I successfully pin it on someone else who is innocent, because the judge trusted pen and paper.
Well, in that case it's nice that you're so willing to throw your friends under a bus.
Friends of which you in a short while won't have any.
-
If the rear end collision increases outweigh the number of intersection collisions reduced, by red-light cameras, should you stop using them?
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They don't have red lights or mall entrances.
You must be lucky to have never had someone swerve in front of you out of the blue and then slow down. Or been behind a sudden accident.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
If the rear end collision increases outweigh the number of intersection collisions reduced, by red-light cameras, should you stop using them?
It depends
-
This guy's list leaves out perhaps the most important problem: Exploding gas stations due to people using the little clip (or whatever) that keeps the gas pumping but allow you to let go of the handle.
WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE EXPLODING GAS STATIONS
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Well, in that case it's nice that you're so willing to throw your friends under a bus.
Friends of which you in a short while won't have any.Goodwill and pen and paper is not something I want to rely on when the stakes are that high.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
If the rear end collision increases outweigh the number of intersection collisions reduced, by red-light cameras, should you stop using them?
I don't care? When did I ever talk about that?
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Well, in that case it's nice that you're so willing to throw your friends under a bus.
Friends of which you in a short while won't have any.Goodwill and pen and paper is not something I want to rely on when the stakes are that high.
And neither does the state. Surprise!
You seem to be under the delusion that this is the only document the court will consider. And as soon as the court gets a whiff of you trying to pull a fast one, you'll feel like the moon just came down on you.
-
@FrostCat said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They don't have red lights or mall entrances.
You must be lucky to have never had someone swerve in front of you out of the blue and then slow down. Or been behind a sudden accident.
No, but you idiotic is giving me whiplash.
"RED LIGHT CAMERAS MAKE TAILGATERS CRASH!"
Control the traffic to keep them at a distance, or slow enough to stop.
"HAHAHA PEOPLE COME OUT OF MALLS AND YOU'RE AT A RED LIGHT"
wtf? That has nothing to do with red light cameras
"OMFG HIGHWAYS!!!!!!!!!!!"
Highways don't have red lights OR malls, so this has nothing to do with anything.
"OMFG PEOPLE CUT YOU OFF THEN STOP"
What the shit does that have to do with red lights?!?
-
@Rhywden Then under what circumstance do you trust cameras?
In Houston, rear end collisions increased, while intersection collisions remained about the same.
In Houston, yellow light durations decreased, giving drivers less time to respond to red lights.
The violations were civil penalties because you couldn't prove who the driver was, and why would you want to create more havoc in the courtroom over a minor violation.There was absolutely no reason to defend automation of traffic violations, from a system that couldn't identify the driver, and didn't care about context.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
"OMFG PEOPLE CUT YOU OFF THEN STOP"
What the shit does that have to do with red lights?!?That's the real legit case.
People that would have run the redlight, come out of a driveway, cut you off, then slam on the breaks to avoid the red-light ticket.
Sure, you get them on cutting you off, and you're not responsible.
But now you're in a neckbrace... over something that was supposed to reduce collisions.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden Then under what circumstance do you trust cameras?
In Houston, rear end collisions increased, while intersection collisions remained about the same.
In Houston, yellow light durations decreased, giving drivers less time to respond to red lights.
The violations were civil penalties because you couldn't prove who the driver was, and why would you want to create more havoc in the courtroom over a minor violation.There was absolutely no reason to defend automation of traffic violations, from a system that couldn't identify the driver, and didn't care about context.
I still don't care? You seem to be under the delusion that I care about your shitty 3rd world justice system?
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I still don't care? You seem to be under the delusion that I care about your shitty 3rd world justice system?
Yeah, but yours only works because you assume people are honest...
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
And as soon as the court gets a whiff of you trying to pull a fast one, you'll feel like the moon just came down on you.
Ok, and that's my question this entire time.
What other reliable evidence do they use?
-
@Groaner said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
the posted speed limit is 55, while the flow of traffic is around 75-80 when not rush hour.
I-95 in Massachusetts is that way (so are lots of other roads.) The cops don't go after people for driving at whatever speed the majority of people are driving at; in this case they'd be stopping people doing 85+.
-
Has anyone studied how blackboxes work? I read a comment before and it made me wonder about whether it is possible that having one attached to a car constantly could end up being the cause of a collision.
My rough understanding is that it is a dongle that plugs into the OBD-II port on the car and constantly polls one of the ECUs for the current speed, RPM, etc. If so, could that interfere with the normal operation of an ECU?
It seems possible, if the ECU has to constantly service the commands from the dongle then it may be too busy to respond to other events within the manufacturer's design limits. There are multiple ECUs that handle different functions, but what happens on that one make/model where OBD-II and the dashboard display are running on the same ECU? Or brake pedal sensor? (Or, alternatively, where the OBD-II ECU is in turn adding more commands on a CAN-bus and that interferes with another critical function?)
I wonder if this may end up in a courtroom some day...
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I still don't care? You seem to be under the delusion that I care about your shitty 3rd world justice system?
Yeah, but yours only works because you assume people are honest...
I don't quite know how to make you understand this: A legal system does not assume at any point that people are honest.
That's why we have a legal system in the first place.
Seriously, dude, you're channeling brain damage very strongly right now.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
then immediately slow down
don't do that, either, unless you make sure to leave plenty of room between you and the truck, unless you want to wind up with the truck in your back seat.
-
@quijibo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Has anyone studied how blackboxes work? I read a comment before and it made me wonder about whether it is possible that having one attached to a car constantly could end up being the cause of a collision.
My rough understanding is that it is a dongle that plugs into the OBD-II port on the car and constantly polls one of the ECUs for the current speed, RPM, etc. If so, could that interfere with the normal operation of an ECU?
It seems possible, if the ECU has to constantly service the commands from the dongle then it may be too busy to respond to other events within the manufacturer's design limits. There are multiple ECUs that handle different functions, but what happens on that one make/model where OBD-II and the dashboard display are running on the same ECU? Or brake pedal sensor? (Or, alternatively, where the OBD-II ECU is in turn adding more commands on a CAN-bus and that interferes with another critical function?)
I wonder if this may end up in a courtroom some day...
I think we just wandered into serious tinfoil-hat country.
-
My entire point, all this time, is that you escalated a minor infraction into an expensive and drawn out court case, because you simply wanted to catch more speeders.
What's going to happen, is that the court is going to be overburdened, and the judges will simply start to ignore anyone that challenges the automated system.
Over here, we anticipated that, and simply made it a civil penalty.
Unless your population / judge ratio is vastly smaller than ours, or people simply aren't challenging the tickets in Germany.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
"OMFG PEOPLE CUT YOU OFF THEN STOP"
What the shit does that have to do with red lights?!?That's the real legit case.
People that would have run the redlight, come out of a driveway, cut you off, then slam on the breaks to avoid the red-light ticket.
Sure, you get them on cutting you off, and you're not responsible.
But now you're in a neckbrace... over something that was supposed to reduce collisions.
I'm sorry, I just don't see that happening either. Why are you going so fast that you end up in a neck brace right in front of a red light? It just doesn't seem feasible to me.
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why are you going so fast that you end up in a neck brace right in front of a red light?
You could end up in a neck brace at a 20mph collision.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@quijibo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Has anyone studied how blackboxes work? I read a comment before and it made me wonder about whether it is possible that having one attached to a car constantly could end up being the cause of a collision.
My rough understanding is that it is a dongle that plugs into the OBD-II port on the car and constantly polls one of the ECUs for the current speed, RPM, etc. If so, could that interfere with the normal operation of an ECU?
It seems possible, if the ECU has to constantly service the commands from the dongle then it may be too busy to respond to other events within the manufacturer's design limits. There are multiple ECUs that handle different functions, but what happens on that one make/model where OBD-II and the dashboard display are running on the same ECU? Or brake pedal sensor? (Or, alternatively, where the OBD-II ECU is in turn adding more commands on a CAN-bus and that interferes with another critical function?)
I wonder if this may end up in a courtroom some day...
I think we just wandered into serious tinfoil-hat country.
That's not tinfoil hat, that's pessimistic about programmer competence.
I don't think it's really likely (that would be one hell of a hug to trigger) but it's not totally out of the realm of possibility
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why are you going so fast that you end up in a neck brace right in front of a red light?
You could end up in a neck brace at a 20mph collision.
So you're going 20mph through the red light?
-
@sloosecannon You're decelerating from 55mph in a feeder onto a highway, and someone pulls out of the feeder facing exit on a gas station, and at that point you've decelerated to 20mph, but haven't completed your stop.
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why are you going so fast that you end up in a neck brace right in front of a red light?
You could end up in a neck brace at a 20mph collision.
So you're going 20mph through the red light?
I'm also not quite sure that @xaade understands the meaning behind the red light.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon You're decelerating from 55mph in a feeder onto a highway, and someone pulls out of the feeder facing exit on a gas station, and at that point you've decelerated to 20mph, but haven't completed your stop.
So you're decelerating so rapidly that a single car is the difference between 0 and 20? You've probably already engaged the anti-locks.....
-
@sloosecannon When the car slammed on its breaks from the feeder facing exit, that's easily 3 car lengths.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon You're decelerating from 55mph in a feeder onto a highway, and someone pulls out of the feeder facing exit on a gas station, and at that point you've decelerated to 20mph, but haven't completed your stop.
And then you go through the red light at 20 mph at which point you're run over by the truck from the right which only looked at his now green light.
I mean, while we're doing pie-in-the-sky scenarios here.
-
@sloosecannon 4. cloned car
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
And then you go through the red light at 20 mph at which point you're run over by the truck from the right which only looked at his now green light.
You wouldn't be doing 20 if you didn't make a full stop at the intersection.
You can easily and safely stop from 20 to the red-light from the distance of a feeder facing exit.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon When the car slammed on its breaks from the feeder facing exit, that's easily 3 car lengths.
But you've now got a car in front of you. So you should see it and react accordingly.
I mean, unless you're talking about people pulling out into 50mph traffic, which is kinda irrelevant to the issue at hand here.
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
But you've now got a car in front of you. So you should see it and react accordingly.
I've watched these kinds of wrecks happen. Where the person coming down the feeder was not at fault and was stopping for the red-light.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
feeder facing exit.
You keep saying that, I'm not familiar with that term. You have an example?
-
@xaade and not paying attention to the idiot who pulled out in front of him?
-
A gas station on the corner of a road that has on-ramps onto a highway.
Traditionally the speed limit for these "feeder" roads is 50-55.