News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by gnicholas on Thursday January 25, 2024 @07:14PM (#39137291)
> The technology would use GPS and a database of roadway speeds to prevent cars from going 10 miles per hour over the speed limit wherever they are.

Sometimes my GPS thinks I'm on an adjacent road, especially when I'm on the freeway. Seems like that kind of error would be catastrophic in combination with a system like this. Also, what's the rationale for letting people go 10 over the limit? That's effectively admitting that people go 10 over the limit, and it's OK.

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by quantified on Thursday January 25, 2024 @07:53PM (#39137617)
Re 10 over: As-written and as-lived are quite different. You'd see the governor turned out in the next election if he signed that bill.

Michael Dukakis lost his home state of Massachusetts in the presidential race after he sicced the state police on drivers for exactly this during his campaign.

The law says to stay stopped at a stop sign for 3 seconds, and signal turns 800 feet in advance on the highway too, 600 feet on streets. (According to family who had their driving tests recently.)

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by fyrn_ on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:50PM (#39138024)
Those distances vary per state in case you didn't know
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by twoodfin on Thursday January 25, 2024 @10:26PM (#39138580)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_United_States_presidentia...

Michael Dukakis did not have a great election night, but he did win his home state.

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by kirubakaran on Thursday January 25, 2024 @07:44PM (#39137547)
> what's the rationale for letting people go 10 over the limit

One reason among many: for passing, especially semis, without spending forever in their blind-spot

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by tjohns on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:43PM (#39137979)
Also, safety. Being able to floor it during an emergency can sometimes get you out of an impending crash - if the situation is right, and your reaction time is quick enough.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by gnicholas on Thursday January 25, 2024 @09:10PM (#39138159)
Oh for sure, but that could require going more than 10 over the limit. I can't imagine needing to go 25 over the limit under pretty much any (non-apocalyptic) circumstance, but 10 doesn't seem like sufficient for this type of situation.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by gnicholas on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:01PM (#39137669)
Is it technically legal to exceed the speed limit when passing? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying no one ever speeds. I’m just wondering what the reasoning would be in this case. Seems to reify speeding, if anything.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by tjohns on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:40PM (#39137954)
No, it's definitely illegal, at least by the letter of the law.

But as long as you're only going a few miles over the speed limit for a few moments, nobody's going to write you a ticket for it.

One of many situations where the law in theory and practical application differ, since officers are given discretion (read: ability to apply common sense) in their duties.

It's not a perfect system, but it's what we've got.

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by chiph on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:49PM (#39138017)
Not in my state. And probably few, if any others. But it is a safety thing. The longer you spend in the oncoming lane completing a pass, the higher the risk of a collision (cars pulling out of driveways into the lane, people misjudging distances, etc.).

There's also what I've observed (not sure if there's an official name for it), that if you pass someone slowly, they will "lock tractor beams" onto you and start to match your speed. So you want to have a noticeable speed difference between your vehicles to prevent this.

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by kirubakaran on Thursday January 25, 2024 @11:12PM (#39138881)
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by gnicholas on Thursday January 25, 2024 @11:21PM (#39138926)
Oof, that one about the misidentified blue Camry sounds maddening.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by cameronh90 on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:08PM (#39137717)
Are blind spot mirrors not mandatory there?
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by tjohns on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:35PM (#39137915)
Mirrors or not, hanging out in the blind spot is a dangerous place to be. You don't want to be there for any length of time longer than absolutely necessary.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by JackeJR on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:06PM (#39137711)
Measurement error of tools used to catch you speeding?
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by gnicholas on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:29PM (#39137876)
I understand why cops would have give leeway, but here the measurement tool would be your speedometer. Although I’ve heard some manufacturers make theirs a little on the slow side, I’d think they’d be pretty accurate in general.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by tjohns on Thursday January 25, 2024 @08:37PM (#39137932)
Changes in tire size will impair speedometer accuracy.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by rascul on Thursday January 25, 2024 @09:03PM (#39138113)
And your tire gets smaller over time with wear.
Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by nimfan on Friday January 26, 2024 @06:57AM (#39141650)
Text of the proposed law [1]:

"28171. (a) Commencing with the 2027 model year, every passenger vehicle... be equipped with an intelligent speed limiter system." and (b) "be capable of being temporarily disabled by the driver of the vehicle."

Also: (c) "shall be capable of being fully disabled by the manufacturer or a franchisee, but only as provided in Section 28172." (28172 is about EMS etc.).

I smell loopholes for me (politicians, and likely techies ;-), but not for thee.

Also interesting how GPS jammers haven't entered the chat yet?

[1] https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB961/2023

Re:Controversial California bill would physically stop new c... by m-p-3 on Friday January 26, 2024 @12:38PM (#39145330)
The car speedometer will estimates the vehicle's speed by measuring the number of revolutions per minute of one of the wheel or its transmission.

If the car has different-sized tires than the ones it was originally designed for, there may be some discrepancies between the actual speed vs the speedometer readings, which is why there is some leeway in the speed limit to account for that margin of error.