This is too simplistic thinking. For example a basic speed limiter can be very dangerous when overtaking slower cars, where it might be dangerous in some situations to not be able to go above the speed limit for a short moment.
See? You can visualize flaws with these kind of simple systems fairly quickly, don't you think similar ones exist in the purportedly "self-driving" cars?
There are literally millions of situations where a Tesla might do the wrong thing, and some of them have been caught on camera.
If we can't put speed limiters on cars, we definitely shouldn't be putting highly complicated computers in charge with no humans at the wheel.
> If we can't put speed limiters on cars, we definitely shouldn't be putting highly complicated computers in charge with no humans at the wheel.
This argument makes no sense.
How do obvious edgecases invalidating a simple solution have any bearing on the feasibility of a complex solution being able to handle as many edgecases as a human driver?
I think the point is more of a bikeshedding problem: people are more willing to accept “AI” because they are not knowledgeable enough to come up with a counter-example, whereas given a simple automation like “don’t go above the speed limit” any joe on the street can think of why that’s a problem.
If there’s no way to safely overtake a slower car without breaking the speed limit, then just don’t. A self driving car shouldn’t decide to do that either. Also, a speed limiter could easily be designed to allow exceeding the speed limit for a short moment.
Ideally true, but not true in practice. When you're on the open road and the speed limit is 55mph, but everyone is going 80mph+, then anyone going the speed limit is a hazard. The speed limit is just an abstract notion at that point. Sure you may be violating the law, but I'm more worried about laws of physics at that velocity.
You'll have people passing you on the left and behind you at +30mph. The cars behind you in your lane will form a queue of waiting to pass you, and they'll be getting into the right lane needing to accelerate from 55mph to 80mph (hard for a lot of cars). This is going to cause the cars in the fast lane to brake, which will cascade through the lane and cause a traffic slowdown. If someone isn't paying attention, it's going to result in a rear end collision and an hours-long traffic jam for hundreds of people.
This is one of my worries with self driving cars: They'll follow the letter of the law even when it's not practically safe.
what are the logistics for this? There were 263.6 million cars in the US in 2015 (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unit...), so I'm sure there's even more today. I could see having manufacturers install speed governers in new cars, but how would you coordinate installing in all the "old" cars? There'd be a period (probably years) where some, but not all cars don't have that limitation.
No, it's the opposite in a situation where people are mostly going 80 and only a few are doing the speed limit. Try traveling down interstate 95, this is an every day situation.
Look at traffic as a fluid: A stream is calm when the water flows at the same speed and direction, when there is nothing to get in the way. Put a rock into the stream and now water has to move around it, causing flow patterns that collide. Traffic can be looked at as a fluid in the same way. If you want it to flow without friction, it all needs to go the same speed in one direction. Accidents and traffic slow-downs are caused when people merge and people have to slow down unexpectedly, which is going to happen when you're going 30mph under the prevailing traffic speed.
Yes, the person going 55 is following the law, but the law was written in a faraway room, a long time ago, by people not driving on the road in that instant. Sometimes in the instant, following the law is not the safe thing to do. It's the same reason it's not safe to go 25 in a 55, and that trucks are required to put their flashers on if they're going under a certain speed. Because they hare a hazard if they are going too slow.
My car has a natural speed limiter (the engine is only 56 hp), and it just means I don't try to do overtaking maneuvers that would be dangerous. If I had a supercar, I would try many more dangerous overtaking maneuvers. Which is safer?
Trucks have been running with governors for decades. That has reduced truck accidents, not increased them. It makes for some idiotic overtaking behavior every now and then (when one truck that goes 89 km/h overtakes a truck that goes 88.5, and it takes forever and then some), but that's a nuisance, not a danger.
This is the absolute state of this debate. You can not overtake if doing so requires exceeding the speed limit.
The best part is the same ignorant people develop the driverless cars, so we get Google cars that turn right across the bike lane instead of merging into it.
> For example a basic speed limiter can be very dangerous when overtaking slower cars
Eh I have a speed limiter I use quite often just to make driving through average speed areas more chill, and it doesn’t stop me pushing the throttle and getting up to full speed if I need to.
It’s a bit smarter than “never go over the speed” - if you push the accelerator in a definite way the car will still respond, while if you hold your foot fairly still and only accelerate gently it will cap out at the max.
