Australia To Test Cars That Won't Let You Speed
from the slow-down,-dave dept
About a year and a half ago, we wrote about plans by transportation authorities in London to test a system that would force drivers to slow down if they were going over the speed limit. We haven't heard much about the tests since then, but it appears that similar tests will soon get underway in Australia (found via TLF). The system involves a GPS-based device that would track where you are against a database of speed limits to determine if you were going over the limit. The system can be programmed to react in three ways. At the lowest level, it would beep at you if you're speeding. A step up from there is where it would automatically cut the gas to slow you down, though there would be a manual override if the driver needed it. Then, there's a third level, where there would be no manual override. It's unclear how widespread the use of this device would be, but apparently there are some discussions about requiring it on all cars -- or (more likely) just for repeat speeding offenders. As we noted when the London tests began, this is attacking the symptom (speeding) rather than the actual disease (bad driving).
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Another stupid rule made by stupid people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another stupid rule made by stupid people
That's not government works. Government makes the decisions and then makes you bear the consequences. Of course, sometimes people don't like that. That's why government has guns too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yikes
Here's the original story.
"The Australasian Intelligent Speed Adaptation Initiative has largely remained out of the public gaze, with governments worried it would attract strong criticism."
No kidding. If "no manual override" terrifies you when you consider that this involves a machine that you operate under conditions where errors can be fatal... you're perfectly justified in feeling that way.
This seems like a good time to bring up some of Don Norman's repeated warnings over the past few years over the harm auto designers can do to their customers by refusing to learn from the mistakes of other industries, especially aviation. Here, here, and here are just some of them.
In particular, the aviation industry has already had its flirtation with software that had no manual override and deemed it to be a bad idea. (I'm not sure if the software ever made it into any actual aircraft; the story I've heard involved consulting pilots on it and them saying, "But here's an example of how I might need to do that with the plane in an emergency...")
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not likely in the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: not likely in the US
I don't think this kind of thing is likely to appear in the U.S. Local Govt. makes way too much money catching speeders to eliminate them. If anything they might have one that signals a nearby traffic cop when you speed or perhaps just issues a ticket through the mail like the traffic light cameras.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: not likely in the US
That's just about what I was going to write. No way would they go for anything that would reduce tickets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does anyone read Bradbury?
The real problem with this idea is uniform enforcement. That is going to be expensive. So, that just means more tickets/taxes.
Aren't traffic tickets just a stupidity tax?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Emergency
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But I would be violently opposed to mandatory machine control of my speed. In fact I would try very hard to disable it.
Would a GPS-based system be cost effective if it had to map speed limits on a scale of yards?
Would I be liable for speeding if the system map was incorrect?
A much more sensible design, in my view, would be one that used smart chips embedded in speed limit signs which my car could interpret..the technology would be similar the speed-pass systems used on toll roads. If you drove into a lower speed limit area and were going too fast, you car would beep at you.. similar to the radar equipped signs used widely now, which warn but do not control. The driver remains in control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would consider it as an option
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deadly Idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thats what its all about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Slow drivers encourage unsafe behavior from people who can't stand driving the 55 mph limit on a road that's safe at 90 but are stuck behind someone doing 50.
The U.S. needs stricter licensing tests, higher speed limits and law enforcement that pays attention to unsafe driving instead of limit breakers.
I can't tell you how many times I've been put in danger by people not using their blinkers when changing lanes or making a turn, but I can tell you how many times I've been put in danger by someone going faster than me: zero.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That isn't totally true. The problem is that the speed limits are unrealistic. The fact people are traveling at a higher speed than the limit isn't the issue. The issue is that the vast majority of people on the road are traveling over the speed limit, while a few very poor drivers are traveling significantly under the limit. When the two speeds meet, bad things happen.
Several things need to happen. First, we need to figure out that not everyone should be on the road. Not everyone is a capable driver and those who are incapable should be removed. Second, the speed limits should be raised to something reasonable, and the police should work on safety issues rather than sign enforcement. Another change needs to be vehicle profiling. If a someone is driving an SUV/Truck at 80MPH, and their equipment is rated at a lower speed (tires, etc), then they should be given a safety violation. It makes no sense to target a performance vehicle for traveling 1/2 it's maximum rated speed, yet not targeting vehicles traveling over their maximum safe speed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
minimum speed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no more tickets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
With the right equipment and right software, it's easy to change a car's prom. In fact - after market proms are made as well, in the event that it's 'hard coded'. They are very common for performance cars.
I can't see it - it would cut out a major source of revenue for the cities, after all if all cars will not exceed the speed limit then there will be no speeding tickets to write.
But... since it's just a machine - and we all know how they can be quirky or malfunction at times - what if the device malfunctions, you have no override and it decides to just jam on the brakes at 65 MPH. Or perhaps, maybe it will determine you are 'going too fast' when you are simply stuck in mud/show/ice and are accelerating to get free? Or perhaps, it won't let you accelerate to avoid an accident.
Lots of possibilities...
Eventually, it would get to the point where people pay less attention to what they are doing, than they do now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupidest Justification
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stupidest Justification
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stupidest Justification
I could go on forever with examples, but, if you're driving 80mph through a 25mph school zone with children present, the speed is a merely a symptom of the fact that you're an idiot who doesn't take your environment into account while operating your vehicle. You can say its the speed, but realistically its reckless driving/endangerment of others.
Going 80mph on a highway designed to handle cars at 90mph but with a rediculously low 55mph speed limit because you and the grandmas of the world can't handle your vehicle, (and so cities can generate revenue) is just the rest of us using common sense.
In specific response to the article; its utterly rediculous. Why not make the license application process more difficult instead of just letting any idiot on the road like "DriversEd".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stupidest Justification
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GPS-based?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's called a govenor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's called a govenor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Probably not a problem in the Land down Under
A survivor who was driving along saw the volcano blow and the pyroclastic flow heading his way. (Back then all he knew was it was a cloud of smoke)
He did a quick 180 and headed in the other direction. He said he passed a station wagon doing 90mph. If I recall correctly, the survivor said he was doing 120mph.
He got away. I remember seeing a picture of the station wagon smashed up against downed trees covered in ash. The passengers didn't make it.
If some govt. clown tries this on any of my cars, I'll make sure it's ripped out. There have been to many times I've had to exceed the speed limit significantly in life threatening situations.
Just my $0.05
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Level 1 is useless (people will just tune out the beeping or find some way to shut it off) and level 3 is too extreme (imagine the lawsuits over emergency situations), but level 2 should be a good setting. What this would do is keep accidental speeders (not all speeding is intentional) in check. However, in the case of an emergency like, say, a tornado or tidal wave coming at you from behind (feel free to insert non-sarcastic real-world scenarios here), you could hit the override and floor it.
Now as far as law enforcement, if your car is equipped with such a device and you're still caught speeding, that means you had to intentionally hit the override option to go faster, which means lame excuses won't get you out of a ticket anymore. I think that would help change a few habits.
On the flip side though, I also agree that this is a band-aid, not a cure for the real problem. I'm thinking that we need a more strict method of licensing drivers, and that we should retest more often. Driving is a privilege, and it is taken for granted far too much. I don't think a written re-test every two years would be out of line, and a driving re-test at least once every 4 years.
People can get bad driving habits that are never touched on during written tests, and they need to be corrected for the safety of all. Plus that would make a good opportunity to make sure people know how to properly maintain their vehicles too, to ensure we don't have dangerous pieces of junk being driven around.
And finally, the testing fees would give the states more revenue to (hopefully) put towards road and bridge repairs that are far, far overdue.
As for the GPS part, that is a bad, bad, bad idea. My vote would be something like RFID tags embedded in speed limit sign posts that the car would scan as it drove by. That, IMO, would be much more reliable than a stupid database somewhere which could easily be inaccurate or out of date. Imagine this in a construction zone on the highway. The road workers plop down a reduced speed sign, and the cars instantly slow down, keeping everyone safer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: rfid tag "idea"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Then, all I have to do is put a hacked RFID tag by the side of the road:
"You were exceeding the speed limit by 25 mph"
"But officer, my car's computer said that the speed limit was 90 mph"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"You were exceeding the speed limit by 25 mph"
"But officer, the sign said that the speed limit was 90 mph"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Insert gadget, remove brain
And if they do, then the car could accelerate rapidly if the GPS signal were lost or if the care entered an unmapped area.
Imaging jamming GPS reception along some stretch of highway and watching a bunch of cars suddenly accelerate out of control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Insert gadget, remove brain
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enough is Enough
We have reached the point where the government no longer does what we want it to do, we do what it wants us to do, all under the guise of safety and security.
They want to filter online content. They want to control how fast you drive. They want to monitor your email and phone lines. They want you to take off your shoes in airports. They want this. They want that.
Why are we letting them do this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People want safe streets, they don't want to die. Some see limiting cars to the speed limit as a life saving thing. Overall, it would be a life saving thing.
It is hard to take seriously someone's right to break the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And what is law? Law is supposed to reflect morality. Is speeding in a motor vehicle of itself a moral offense? No, as it causes no harm to others in of itself. Show me the person that is hurt by someone going 70 on a 60 limit freeway? You can't. Causing property damage and personal injury with a car are true crimes as they are moral offenses when they are caused by either malice or negligence.
Just because the law books say something is a crime doesn't make it morally wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Bull. They generally do what those with the most money want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Revenue????
Still a bad idea though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Revenue????
That's just how they split up the "loot". In case you hadn't noticed, all those court and law enforcement people are government employees and thus part of government. That ticket money eventually winds up in their paychecks.
And as for your assertion that most speeders never pay their tickets, I say bullshit.
In fact, it's not unusual to come out in the red.
That's what happens when you spend more than you take in. No matter how much they take in, there's never enough money for some people, is there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If it keeps me from getting a ticket, I'm for it.
When used with a radar detector, this system just provides more information. The radar detector tells me if someone is openly watching me, the speed limit checker tells me if I fail to see a speed limit sign.
I want every tool I can get that will help me avoid unnecessary tickets. This could be just another tool to help keep money in *MY* pocket.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Couple Things
1) A hacker could get in and either raise the speed limit on all roads. Or be malicious and set the speed limit to 5.
2) What in the cases where you really need to speed, like a wife giving birth? And usually the police go to stop you, and you tell them whats going on, and they freaking clear you a path. Would the police be able to disable these systems for cases like that?
Seems like a dumb idea.
And like Mike said, addressing the symptom and not the cause.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All these hypotheticals are nice, but the fact is, if everyone went the speed limit, everyone would be safer. I know you are all expert drivers out there, but the fact is if everyone went the speed limit, less people would die on our roads. You want to drive fast? Change the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, people driving under the limit are a real danger. I have yet to hear of a rear-end wreck where the car in front wasn't going too slow for the car behind them. Get the slow-asses off the road and save lives!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Speed doesn't kill anyone - sudden stops do. You don't hear stories about people dying "speed" cause a car exceeded the speed limit. Theres always some form of either driver negligence or a random event that would've been an accident regardless of speed.
The driver should always be in total control and should be rigorously taught and tested before being given it.
That and penalties for driving offenses should be much more strict, especially driving under the influence.
Being caught driving with alcohol in the system should be an instant loss of the license.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
imagine this
there is a tornado closing in on you from behind.
you die, because the fucking car would not agree to go more than 25 miles an hour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Minimum and maximum speeds
1) If this device is going to restrict how fast you go, it should also restrict how slow you go. If the posted speed limit on a highway is 70 mph, obviously that means you shouldn't go 80 mph... but it also means you shouldn't go 55 to 60 mph!
On I-75, between Tampa and Ft Myers, the posted speed limit is 70 mph, yet I have driven that stretch of road over and over and over again where an RV was doing 60 mph in the right lane and an 18-wheeler had to pass him in the left lane, at 65 mph. So the 18-wheeler is going below the speed limit in the "fast lane".
And, as usual, traffic that wanted to go 75 to 80 mph (or even the 70 mph speed limit) backed up for miles as the 18-wheeler slowly passed the RV.
Or does it take education, like some posters suggestion? Maybe the idea is to teach drivers that not every highway in the US has a 55 mph speed limit and that they should actually read the posted speed limit signs on each highway.
And what about vehicles that aren't capable of going to 70 mph speed limit, such as the RV towing a car or a large construction vehicle? Would the speed device actually put the driver in danger? Or should we start a debate about how RV's and construction vehicles shouldn't be on that highway in the first place?
2) If this device limits your speed, but not everyone else's, will it actually put you in danger by not allowing you to keep up with traffic?
I've driven on numerous roads where the posted speed limit was 55 mph, yet even when I did 70 to keep up with traffic, other people still blew past me.
If I stuck to 55 mph and everyone else was doing 75 to 80, how long would it be until I was the one who created an accident?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Funny thing though: even the EMT services around here recommend you drive in from the country because it's so much faster.
I sincerely hope that someone in your life goes trough what my ex has and you're stuck driving them in to save their life; maybe then you won't be such a prick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Australia has HUGE fines for speeding
Western Australia is four times the size of Texas with a population of ~2 million. You can leave the capital (Perth) and drive at 110Kmh for 24 hours and not leave the state!
Not many police around, much more likely to encounter a large (2m) Kangaroo or Emu (>1.5m) on the roads here.
The police have many mobile speed radar cameras, 'multinovas'. These cameras are set to record anyone exceeding the speed limit by 5Kmh.
Fines are
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cut off the last post...
5-9Kmh (~5m) costs Au$75.
10-19Kmh (~10m) costs Au$150.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GPS
Big cities frequently have freeways very close to/above/below surface streets. What happens if you are cruising along at 70 in heavy traffic and the GPS decides you aren't on the freeway and slows you down to 25? The corollary is also true because it may not prevent someone from speeding through a neighborhood.
This looks like security theatre to me, so politicians can say they did something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe if your parents didn't live in the sticks, people would actually care about what they have to say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not everyone lives within 15 minutes of a hospital; get used to it and respond to the facts according to reality, not your adolescent superiority fantasies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Australia is clueless
Just because you can do somthing technologicaly to make things "rigth" does not mean you should. Period. Aussie politicians are such arse wipres in this area. Balance the trae offs to the other less obvious aspects of free choice, indirect taxation (the system would cost a bucket load), personal freedoms.
For example if you follow the currnt logic down under with the internet censoring and now this, then it wont be long until they make smoking illegal because it bad for you, and they they can even go all out and start fining you for not doing things. E.g you failed to go to the Gym, thats a fine..
Australia is only 200 years old, and although very forthright and young, really gets it wrong in terms of how to apply that to a society.
I wonder how broken the election voting system is in Oz, because dump laws ofetn come from countries where the election system is not really representational. Represents a small percentgae of the population or companies for example.
Glad i left oZ many moons ago..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]