Honestly, if this is how it's implemented in every car (the article just vaguely says that some cars slow down automatically, without specifying how easy it is to override), then this is a surprisingly reasonable implementation. (Surprising, because politicians, especially in Europe, tend to go for reality-ignoring nanny-state solutions nowadays).

I think doing it in a way that's respectful of the owner is a good way to do it in the long term. It gets most of the benefit, and by not creating a "us vs. them" mentality, it avoids both political backlash that makes future regulations (including sensible ones) hard, and the backlash effect that causes people to behave in undesirable ways out of spite/defiance (think "coal rolling").

Edit: It seems (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31994739) like they explicitly mandated putting the driver in control. Bravo!

>(Surprising, because politicians, especially in Europe, tend to go for reality-ignoring nanny-state solutions nowadays)

Examples?

Parts of GDPR (cookie law++, 100 people organization expectations for random one man software operations in japan, etc) and the current efforts to effectively remove end to end encryption from people's chat programs are two good examples.

The EU is not the lone offender in this of course, many other countries have similar issues, such as the USA's FATCA.

> current efforts to effectively remove end to end encryption from people's chat programs

May be out of the loop here but do you have some source where we can catch up on the state of this?

In case you're referring specifically of the DSA/DMA (the recent interoperability bombshell), I don't see how that's currently an effort to remove E2EE.

Also keep in mind that only "gatekeepers" (as defined) are under scope here. E.g. Signal is small enough to not be in scope. As long as your chat program is not controlled by a multi-billion-dollar corporation you should be good.

Arathorn from New Vector has written a series of insightful blog posts about this[3].

References:

2022 EU parliament DSA amendment[0]:

> Member States should not prevent providers of intermediary services from providing end-to-end encrypted services. Applying effective end-to-end encryption to data is essential for trust in and security on the Internet, and effectively prevents unauthorised third party access. Furthermore, to ensure effective digital privacy, Member States should not impose a general obligation on providers of intermediary services to limit the anonymous use of their services. In accordance with the principle of data minimisation and in order to prevent unauthorised disclosure, identity theft and other forms of abuse of personal data, recipients should have the right to use and pay for services anonymously wherever reasonable efforts can make this possible

DSM FAQ[1]:

> The final agreement on the interoperability obligation also ensures that the levels of service integrity, security and encryption offered by the gatekeeper shall and will not be reduced.

...However, I can't seem able to find the referred final agreement. The publicized document is (still?) the 2020 version[2] which contains no references to encryption AFAICT.

I don't mean to imply that you are wrong here as contradictory (is there a better non-toxic way to say "schizophrenic"?) tech regulation initiatives seems to be a trend with the EU. But please provide more details as there has been a lot of confusion around this.

[0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0014...

[1]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/QANDA_...

[2]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?qid=16081168...

[3]: https://matrix.org/blog/2022/03/30/technical-faq-on-the-digi...

> However if you never turn on "cruise control", the feature is nothing but an easy to ignore red symbol on your HUD.

So I drove a rental car that had this feature enabled and I found it not only infuriating but distracting as well.

It didn't help that it would come on at the worst possible times. Like when I was driving and had to change lanes to pass someone or let another car in. This is exactly the time where I want to be completely focused on what I'm doing and instead I have a notification on my dash going `ding! you went 5kph` over the speed limit.

In my car it's literally a symbol that's always there that silently turns red, there's nothing annoying, infuriating or otherwise attention-grabbing about it, it's just something you'll see if you happen to look at the speedometer.

I wouldn't assume that your experience applies to all cars. Different manufacturers will implement it differently.

It's not very encouraging that you are trying to overtake someone by speeding.

I prefer to quickly get past someone so that even faster traffic can also proceed. It's more dangerous to keep 2 lanes occupied while a line of cars is pushing behind you. It's a fact that some cars will go fast, better to let them pass. Obviously still being safe while speeding... If someone in the right lane is going 95km/hr, I'm willing to speed up to around 105-108km/hr - it's perfectly safe.

The reasons other cars want to go fast/exceed the limit is not really something I worry about. What if they're going to the hospital? What if they're undercover cops getting to a scene? What if they just want to get to work fast? I don't care. I care about my safety, so better get out of their way safely. If I notice someone coming up behind me with 120km/hr in a 100km/hr zone, I am 100% speeding up so I can move out of their way. If I don't, all that's going to happen is them having to brake hard, causing other behind them to brake out of instinct... It's the fault of the person speeding of course, but people at fault aren't the only ones getting hurt by their actions.

Any sensible driver on the road knows to prioritize a safe (aka quick) overtake maneuver over a prolonged one that keeps things under the speed limit. It's great if both things can be achieved. But if not, the two preferable options are to stay behind, or to do it safely and in a way that doesn't hinder any other cars.

If it’s prolonged by staying under the speed limit then perhaps the other vehicle isn’t actually going that slowly and so doesn’t need to be overtaken?

Indeed, and that's why staying behind is always an option. Driving is an activity governed by a set of regulations, but common sense is the glue that ties everything together. This includes when to bend or break rules.

Kinda like programming.

I have done the advanced motorcycle training and safety - everyone’s, not just mine - is the top priority, and overtaking safely and smoothly is paramount. If you happen to exceed the speed limit briefly while doing so, it is not commented on. Safety is the main constraint when riding or driving, not speeding.

How many times have you overtaken someone outside of a highway?

That sounds much better. I would freak out if my car would accelerate or decelerate on its own, especially when it does not have to. As other people have said, I do not think the technology is there yet. Maybe in major cities, highways it might be possible, eventually, but forget A LOT of roads.

With the exception of neighborhood streets and busy trunk roads, my speed is being governed by the vehicle in front of me, thanks to adaptive cruise control. It was a bit unnerving at first, but now I turn it on the moment I'm on the highway. I suspect manual speed control will go the way of the manual transmission.

And it does have an override -- I can step on the gas any time I want -- but I've never used it.

I drove a Peugeot in the UK earlier this year, with all these features, including lane assist. And driving on the 'freeway' it was more or less good (when it could find the speed limit).

On the B roads it had no more idea of what the speed limit was than I did. On roundabouts it was hit (almost) and miss.

And C roads, especially with a bit of morning ice and sunshine it actively tried to kill me, on dozens of occasions trying to steer me into oncoming traffic or off the sides of steep embankments. Even when it was technically correct in tracking me round a bend, to have to forcefully correct the car mid corner to avoid an oncoming lorry wandering into my lane is just bloody dangerous.

Personally, I just prefer to just pay attention to the road myself.

This is obviously only intended to be used on A roads. That you even tried it on C roads is a bit scary.

All it does is keep you from plowing into the car in front of you on the freeway. It also does a so so job helping you stay in your lane. Helping, not doing it all on its own.

Clearly I did not use the cruise control on a C road. The lane assist seemed to be always on though, no obvious switch and menus deep I could not find a way to turn it off. That and the fact it mistook ice for lane marking is crazy.

Bad UI? or just bloody dangerous?

edit: checked and apparently it is also on by default, no permanent off switch, and there were quite a few comments from owners indicating they couldn't find the switch.. so I don't feel so bad for missing it

That sounds awful. I've only ever driven Toyota lane assist vehicles (3 different ones), and they all had a button on the steering wheel to turn off lane assist and the annoying beeping it does.

I only really use these features on the motorway. I disengage cruise control and lane keeping assist using buttons on the steering wheel just before I exit the motorway.

> or by the accelerator pedal gently pushing their foot back.

> In some versions, the vehicle’s speed is automatically reduced.

Sounds to me like it isn't so optional, and of course how hard would it be to move it from optional to non-optional?

As I understand, you just have to have "cruise control" turned off, and these things will not happen.

The implementation is up to the manufacturer. In my car it's just a red symbol on the HUD. As far as I'm aware the law doesn't mandate the snippets you've quoted.

my car has these features and sometimes thinks the speed limit is 100mph in residential neighborhoods

I've seen 30 recognized as 80mph. Clearly the system didn't even have a plausibility check: in the UK 80mph isn't a legal limit!

It also gets confused when there are overpasses or tunnels crossing the road, and the nav-based speed limit flips from 70mph to 15mph to 70mph.

ah i have seen 80 before, that could explain it it was never clear to me if it was reading the signs or just basing it off of map data

In some neighbourhoods in the Netherlands people put fake '30km/h' signs on their roadside garbage bins. Those are not the official limits, but will be picked up by traffic sign recognition algorithms...

> The form it takes in my car is that there's a little symbol with the current speed limit displayed on the HUD. The speed limit is sourced from road signs or the car's navigation data. When you exceed the speed limit, the symbol turns red.

I've wanted something like this in my vehicles for many years.

the problem is that the car will limit your speed. it will not just alert you.

this is incredibly dangerous as sometimes you need to drive over the speed limit to avoid accidents or dangerous drivers.

instead of introducing this they should send drivers to driving school and make the police check driver licenses more often and arrest those driving without a license.

in germany you can drive at any speed you want in certain areas of the autobahn and that’s great and actually important to be able to get where you want efficiently. i doubt there are more accidents there. but people actually know how to drive and that is the difference.

these kind of speed limiters are just introduced by politicians to gain votes, it’s easy to sell the population on an idea to punish those driving too fast. easier than to do the right thing, which is to remove idiots who can’t drive from traffic.

This contradicts what the poster above you is saying. Do you have a car that behaves differently and doesn't let you override it, or are you making assumptions?

read the article

The regulators permit something akin to kickdown. While the cars will limit you under gentle/steady state driving, if you floor the accelerator to avoid an accident, the limiters will disengage:

3.6.1.4. It shall be possible for the driver to override the SCF intervention by performing a positive action, for example by pressing the accelerator control harder or deeper.

from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:...

at the cost of a delay which could make the difference between life and death

The system acts slowly and and is only active if the driver has engaged it (like cruise control).

You'll be driving at 120kph and you'll notice the car has slowed to 118kph because it thinks the speed limit is 100kph. You push the accelerator and update the speed limit. Done.

I honestly can't see this causing an accident. The thing isn't performing an emergency stop or anything.

I have never really liked that in the USA, the posted speed limit is both the normal speed of travel and the maximum speed permitted. I think legally there should be some allowance for exceeding the speed limit when passing. We have some sections where one must move into the opposing traffic lane to pass, and you have to go over the posted limit to do this. I wonder how the self driving AI software accounts for this.

> I think legally there should be some allowance for exceeding the speed limit when passing

There is. Or rather, there might be. In the US, some states allow you speed while passing. The qualifications on how much you can speed range from "reasonable margin of safety" to specific numbers. And, some states further limit the situations where you can do this, for instance to only allowing it on two lane roads where you're pulling into the oncoming lane to pass.

Mississippi allows for 5 mph at the discretion of the officer. But they generally don't seem to bother in my area unless you're going 15-20 mph over or more.

The car doesn't limit your speed. It only alerts you or updates cruise control. You can always override it by using the pedals. Under no circumstances will the assistance system disable the brakes or accelerator.