News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by growse on Thursday July 31, 2014 @11:52AM (#8114825)
Possibly because the cost/benefit just isn't there.

In the UK, the data shows that speeding (excessive speed for the conditions above the speed limit) is the primary cause in single digit percentage of accidents. I believe there's data from 1996 and 2007 for this, will dig it out when I'm not on mobile.

If you want to spend money on accident prevention, there's much better things to target than speeding.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by saosebastiao on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:21PM (#8115010)
I have yet to get into an accident, but I actively avoid walking across several streets in Seattle because of a combination of entitlement thinking (This road is mine because I'm in a car!), and pervasive speeding. I'm not the only one...I recently found out almost nobody on my side of a local road will cross the road due the same problem. The road, therefore, has become a barrier to commerce and has split a community in two.

Preventing accidents isn't the only reason to enforce traffic laws.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by quux on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:08PM (#8115390)
There aren't any traffic lights and crosswalks on this street?
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by saosebastiao on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:15PM (#8115444)
There are some crosswalks, 8 blocks away from each other. No lights for at least a mile. In WA state, every intersection is automatically a legal crosswalk with pedestrian right of way (unless marked with a "No Pedestrian Crossing" sign), but the lack of enforcement combined with the high speeds makes that right of way effectively meaningless.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by e40 on Thursday July 31, 2014 @02:01PM (#8115834)
I walk a lot in CA. Not long ago I saw a cop not yield to a pregnant woman pushing a baby in a stroller, in a 4 lane road. She was in the crosswalk, clearly marked. There was no light or stop sign, but she was in the middle of the 4 lanes when the cop drove past her in the closest lane. I really couldn't believe what I was seeing.

When the cops don't even respect the laws, the laws are meaningless.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by kelnos on Thursday July 31, 2014 @06:28PM (#8117391)
This doesn't surprise me. I walk a lot too, and I constantly see cops flip their lights on for the few seconds required to make an illegal left turn, run a red light, etc., and then turn them right back off.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by coldpie on Friday August 01, 2014 @08:51AM (#8119512)
Yet another consequence of police immunity from prosecution.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by scott_karana on Thursday July 31, 2014 @03:38PM (#8116473)
Hypothetically remove speeding from the equation, and keep the entitlement.

Would you feel safe crossing the road now?

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by saosebastiao on Thursday July 31, 2014 @04:14PM (#8116704)
Safe(r), yes. Speeding decreases the chances you will die in a collision, and decreases reaction distance.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by koenigdavidmj on Thursday July 31, 2014 @02:50PM (#8116160)
What road are you talking about in particular?

If it's something like 15 Av NW in Ballard, it's pretty obvious that you're meant to cross at a light, even if you legally have more of a right to cross at the uncontrolled intersection one block away. It's unreasonable to expect a highway-in-all-but-name to stop for one person when marked, lit crossings exist within five blocks at all points along the road.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by saosebastiao on Thursday July 31, 2014 @03:26PM (#8116391)
In Ballard there are two. I'm specifically talking about Leary between Market and the 15th Ave overpass, but Market itself is quite the same way east of 15th.

Even in the case of normal 2 lane roads, drivers here still act like pedestrians do not have the right to cross anywhere but a crosswalk (and some don't even respect the crosswalk), and it only gets worse with 3 and 4 lane roads because that is where the drivers tend to drive significantly over the speed limit.

And yes, I do consider it reasonable to expect cars to stop for pedestrians in all scenarios where pedestrians have the right of way. A 5 block detour to cross the street can add another 15 minutes to your quick trip...what would happen if the situation were reversed? Can you imagine the outrage that would happen if cars had to drive 15 minutes out of their way? Slowing down for 5 seconds to let someone walk across the street is a miniscule inconvenience in comparison.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Fomite on Thursday July 31, 2014 @04:38PM (#8116840)
I feel this way in the vast majority of Maryland.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by aidenn0 on Friday August 01, 2014 @12:44PM (#8121306)
Northern Virginia is that way too. Even with marked crosswalks with yield to pedestrian signs, crossing at an intersection without a traffic light is downright scary.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Retric on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:39PM (#8115135)
%of total accidents is amost meaningless. % of accident deaths or even %of totaled cars would be a much better indicator. A parking lot fender bender is vary different than an 80MPH head on collision.

Also, even if speeding is not the direct cause of an accident it increases the damage resulting from an accident.

PS: It has been estimated that hard limiting private vehicles to 40MPH would have saved over 2 Million lives in the US. Not that I am promoting such a low speed limit but people really don't understand the dangers of speed. Every year after 1945 at least 30,000 people died with a peak well over 50,000.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by rrreese on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:00PM (#8115329)
New Zealand keeps fairly good records which can be downloaded here: http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documen... page 62 lists the percentage of crashes, crashes with injuries and crashes with fatalities. Speed is constantly found in around 30% of fatal crashes.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by nucleardog on Thursday July 31, 2014 @07:23PM (#8117576)
Saying speed is found as a factor in around 30% of fatal crashes doesn't really say much as to the effectiveness of these sorts of measures. I mean, right off the bat I have to ask - what is the overlap between "people in fatal crashes with speed as a factor" and "people who receive automated speeding tickets".

I think as a percentage it would be unimaginably tiny which supports the assertion that it is misplaced enforcement if safety is actually the goal.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by CamperBob2 on Thursday July 31, 2014 @07:27PM (#8117589)
And when you consider that more than 30% of drivers are typically speeding on many/most roads...
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Rapzid on Friday August 01, 2014 @11:55AM (#8120751)
If only we were so lucky. 30% of drivers in NZ drive 20km/h below the speed limit on the motorway is more like it :|
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by selectodude on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:00PM (#8114876)
It's not about saving lives. It's about revenue generation.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by MichaelDickens on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:32PM (#8115082)
Speed limit laws don't exist to generate revenue. They exist to disincentivize speeding.

If speed limit laws didn't exist, can you imagine lawmakers saying, "We need more money. Hey, I know! Let's charge people money for driving over a certain speed!"

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by pyre on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:51PM (#8115241)
The laws aren't put into place with the "let's generate revenue" mentality, but their enforcement is definitely done with respect to that mentality. If it's all about getting people to slow down, then:

1) Why aren't law enforcement more focused on getting people to slow down than writing tickets?

2) Why do traffic cops have monthly quotas for tickets?

3) In places where monthly quotas are against the law, why do 'performance revues' of traffic cops only focus on '# of tickets' as the largest performance metric? (basically a quota by another name)

4) Why is it so easy to bargain down a speeding ticket in a large city, whereas in a small town they are only willing to haggle on the points on your license (hint: because they still want you money)?

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by saosebastiao on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:40PM (#8115680)
How is a ticket quota any different than a SLOC quota or a SLOC analysis in a performance review?. Quantity of tickets issued is a productivity metric, as flawed as it is. Their existence does not imply that tickets exist for revenue.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by evilduck on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:57PM (#8115297)
Just like no community has ever been found to be shortening yellow light timers after setting up red light cameras, and no cops ever dubiously search cars for drugs so they can seize assets.

Just because they weren't conceived for a purpose doesn't mean that's not how they're used. Speed enforcement is very frequently performed by small town cops sitting on highways that are just barely in their jurisdiction. They're doing it for money, plain and simple.

See https://www.google.com/maps/preview?client=safari&q=hampton+... for proof of this.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by selectodude on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:44PM (#8115707)
>They exist to disincentivize speeding

Where I live, in Chicago, the speed limits are so low on some freeways that 91-98 percent of people are going over the speed limit, and the average speed is over 70mph. So everyone, including the police it seems, agrees that the speed limits here are not for my safety, but exist as a way for the officers to cherry pick essentially any car they want and write them a ticket.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by omegaham on Thursday July 31, 2014 @02:24PM (#8115980)
The idea of a speed limit is sound. But there are organizations that work to game the system. A great example is the multitude of sleepy towns right next to highways. They have a police force that is exclusively utilized on the five miles (or less) of highway that officially fall within the town limits, writing tickets to people who pass through. For example, Lindale, Ohio has a population of about 170 people and collects about $800,000 a year from speeding tickets.

My mother got snagged in one of these in Virginia a while back - they have a hill where the speed limit drops from 65 to 45 at the bottom of it, with a specially planted copse of trees where the police sit with their detectors. A quarter mile down the road, they have a specially built parking lot for people to get their tickets. They even provide envelopes and stamps for people to send their checks! Nice people.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by LordKano on Thursday July 31, 2014 @05:29PM (#8117112)
Virginia is also a state that bans the use of RADAR/LIDAR detectors.

I suspect that this business model is in trouble if GPS makers begin to track speed-limit information and pass that along to their users.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by spott on Thursday July 31, 2014 @03:04PM (#8116253)
Speed limit laws started as a safety thing, then they were a car efficiency thing (during the 70's oil crisis). The problem is that the municipalities started to increasingly depend on the income from traffic enforcement.

No, lawmakers don't say "Hey, I know! Let's charge people money for driving over a certain speed!", they instead say: "lets install these red light cameras on this intersection that doesn't see a lot of accidents.", or "this long straight stretch of highway, with few accidents, but lots of speeding should be better policed". The enforcement of laws becomes more about making money from the tickets than from concerns about safety.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by shoeless on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:41PM (#8115147)
The manufacturers of speed cameras take a percentage, and it is a windfall for the municipality.

I live in an area where stationary speed cameras are around every corner (Montgomery Co, Maryland). I've lived here long enough to know that there's no way the county would spend money on the equipment and man power to maintain and operate that network, just to break even for the sake of safety.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Liesmith on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:38PM (#8115117)
Don't be ridiculous, If it was about revenue there would just be more toll booths.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by mortov on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:50PM (#8115227)
That would only be the case where people accept tolls & toll booths on roads as an acceptable thing.

Sure, they're common in Canada and the US but in some other countries they lead to years of civil disobedience, protests and eventual scrapping by newly elected governments : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skye_Bridge#Toll_controversy

Speed fines have the semi-respectibility claim of trying to reduce accidents/dangers on the road (with some validity).

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Scoundreller on Thursday July 31, 2014 @09:10PM (#8117934)
I'm waiting for someone to calculate the greenhouse gas emissions created by toll booths.
Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by kaoD on Thursday July 31, 2014 @12:47PM (#8115197)
Tolls booths are obviously about the revenue, which make the voter angry.

Not that I support his claim, just refuting yours.

Re:The Lowdown on Lidar by Thrymr on Thursday July 31, 2014 @01:30PM (#8115574)
Even if it's not the primary cause, accidents are much more dangerous at higher speeds. It also makes reaction times shorter for avoiding other things.