If you roll through at 5.6mph while I am jogging into the intersection from your side, I will often be hidden by your A pillar the entire time right up until you hit me. And a 5.6mph point-blank hit to a pedestrian can be serious.

(edit: I have avoided these hits so far by watching people's eyes. If I can't see them see me, I stop regardless of right of way. This usually gives them a nice scare as they're rolling into the intersection and glance out their side window to see a person standing right there 'out of nowhere'. Not sure how I'll tell with FSD.)

This is called a "Constant Bearing / Decreasing Range" collision.

In theory, FSD shouldn't have blind spots like an A pillar for human drivers.

But I agree with your point.

Runners (and the much loved sidewalk cyclists) are much farther from the road than a walking pedestrian. The drivers are NOT seeing you coming.

I don't know about you, but I would prefer not to be hit head on by an adult on a bike traveling 28mph!

On the other hand, an actually stopped car could definitionally not hit someone.

The semi truck won’t actually “hit” you. Not in a way where you’re imparted with it’s full kinetic energy.

I'm actually not sure. The initial impact would hurt more with the bike, suggesting that perhaps momentum or something else proportional to velocity (not v^2) is a good heuristic there.

But if I tripped after impact, the bike would do no further damage to me and the semi would be ~1s away from killing me.

2-3mph I think is more reasonable for rolling through.

Does this dataset actually exist anywhere? I would bet that at best it might be able to be inaccurately inferred from other data.

Regardless, if we as a society decide to build self-driving cars, should we really be optimizing for the financial well-being of the driver (via tickets) over the physical wellbeing of the humans in the society (who are hit by FSD cars that roll stop signs in areas with less traffic enforcement).

They ignore rampant theft and violence and are busting people on empty cross roads in middle of nowhere for not coming to a full and complete stop.

I continue to support policing, but I wish they wouldn't get sucked into this type of work where they basically make even normal people hate them.

It's wild they even put this into a NHTSA filing, not to mention rolling it out in the first place.

If self-driving cars were widely rolled out already, any large manufacturer could probably completely break traffic nationwide by rolling out an update that makes the cars actually follow every law and speed limit. (Just like work-to-rule can be as effective as a strike.)

I'm not sure I agree completely with this reasoning, but it was an interesting perspective.

That was regarding suburban road planning though, not sure if the same applies to freeways and other major arteries.

You wouldn't get that banking up with everybody following the limit.

Can't have it both ways. The statistical evidence is clear: the average US driver is tremendously unsafe, untrained, unobservant and unskilled despite their country being built around driving everywhere. Their remonstrations on all the rule breaking they can perform safely stems purely from ignorance of their own inabilities.

The point is also much more about creating a habit in which this kind of behaviour is just done, regardless of the state of the traffic on the road. The law says you must stop for a stop sign, stop signs are placed in places in which sudden traffic participants could enter your field of vision at a time in which it is too late to react properly.

Also, people get fined for ignoring stop signs, even if no one is present. Driving education in the netherlands is quite strict and so are punishments for drivers. For instance, the driver of a car is always at fault for an accident with a "weak" traffic participant (foot/bike traffic), even if technically they werent at fault. (there is process to fight this in court if you assume ill intent/fraud is at play, although it is rarely used).

the reasoning being that the driver of a car has had a drivers education and can thus act responsible while driving a hunk of metal down the road at lethal speeds.

This is also normal in the US, despite what a few commenters on HN may have you believe. Hell, if anything, regular people out and about at 4am are better about following the basic laws, because you stand out a lot more when you flout them, and in the wee hours of the night the proportion of drunk drivers is far higher and so cops are looking for it.

i don’t mean to overgeneralize. i expect there is at least some small correlation between density and how much you break at a four-way stop, and i’m curious what the other correlates are and how dominant full-stops are.

And a cop will fine you if she sees you do it.

I agree with the concept, because it makes for clear rules. Rules, which shouldn't be up for interpretation by any old driver.

You sound like the kind of person to not signal when you change lanes because you think there's plenty of room.

Still we often get this wrong and somebody gets hurt.

A computer is not cursed with our human impatience so why program it in? But more importantly the computer has none of the general intelligence and situational awareness that a dim human has, and they won’t for a long time.

The laws say to stop, LEO say to stop, etc. I can't think of a defence to not stop beyond "No one else does it."

In fact, the most annoying thing is that they will stop for too long despite the lack of cross-traffic or pedestrians traversing the intersection (in any direction).

Wish they would have looked at data with the feature enabled versus disabled (more rear end collisions possibly)?

As an aside, I assume this is 2.5 m/s converted to mph.

You say: "We added AI to our product" I hear: "We added a bunch more IF statements to our codebase"