SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the avoiding-accidents-is-dangerous-driving dept.
BBC reports that according to Dmitri Dolgov, lead software engineer for Google's driverless car project, Google's self-driving cars are programmed to exceed speed limits by up to 10 mph when surrounding vehicles are breaking the speed limit, because going more slowly could actually present a danger. In many countries, including the United States, the speed limit is a rather nebulous thing. It's posted, but on many roads hardly anybody obeys it.
Almost every driver speeds regularly, and anybody going at or below the limit on a clear road outside the right lane is typically an obstruction to traffic—they will find themselves being tailgated or passed at high speed on the left and right. A ticket for going 1 mph over the limit is an extremely rare thing and usually signals a cop with another agenda or a special day of zero-tolerance enforcement. In fact, many drivers feel safe from tickets up to about 9 mph over the limit. Tickets happen there, but the major penalties require going faster, and most police like to go after that one weaving, racing guy who thinks the limit does not apply to him. Commenting on Google self-drive cars' ability to exceed the speed limit, a Department for Transport spokesman said: "There are no plans to change speed limits, which will still apply to driverless cars".
(Score: 4, Interesting) by quacking duck on Wednesday August 20 2014, @03:31PM
Re: red light and speed cameras... Insurance holds the owner ultimately responsible for giving the keys to whoever is driving the car (except if it's stolen, of course), so why not the law?
The law at least draws the line at a fine for violations on camera, so moving violations don't result in any demerit points like you'd get if caught by cop (that's how it works where I live, anyway).
(Score: 5, Informative) by MrGuy on Wednesday August 20 2014, @03:41PM
Insurance holds the owner ultimately responsible for giving the keys to whoever is driving the car (except if it's stolen, of course), so why not the law?
Only for damages. If I get a speeding ticket, MY insurance rates go up, regardless of whose car I was driving. But insurance is a contractual agreement between two parties (the owner of a car and the insurance company). They can write the contract however they want (well, technically not - insurance is heavily regulated, but the point is insurance is governed by contract law).
To your question of "why shouldn't the law work like insurance comapnies?" the answer is "because that's how the law works." To make out a criminal complaint against an individual (and while they're misdemeanors, traffic charges are criminal charges), you need prima facia evidence that the person being charged committed the crime. And the laws related to the crimes in question (with respect to the crimes in question) relate to the DRIVER of a car. You cannot establish a criminal case against someone for driving a car in violation of the law without providing evidence that the individual charged was in fact driving the car.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by BasilBrush on Wednesday August 20 2014, @10:49PM
In the UK the way it's dealt with is that speeding tickets are not a criminal matter. The are classed as "fixed penalties", which are civil matters. They can become criminal matters if you choose not to deal with them and go to court. Additionally there's a law which says that if the vehicle gets a fixed penalty notice, you have an obligation to tell the authorities who was driving if it wasn't you. So there's no legal avenue for saying "I wasn't driving and I'm not going to say who was."
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 21 2014, @06:39AM
Once someone I know let someone else drive his car (this is in the U.S.). The driver crossed a red light illegally and a ticket came in the mail from one of those ticket cameras. When the owner went to fight it the authorities insisted the owner was the driver based on the photo. The judge also agreed. The owner kept insisting he wasn't the driver. The judge said the driver sure looks like the owner. The owner said he couldn't have been the driver because he was the passenger. So they took a look at the picture of the passenger and, sure enough, it was the owner. The driver wasn't the owner. Case closed. However, they couldn't really go after the driver because the driver was from overseas and had an international license. The driver was no longer in the United States. So the court just dropped the case. In such a case what could they do?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by monster on Thursday August 21 2014, @10:30AM
Put him on the terrorist list.
Now, on a more serious note, it's the same case that happens in Europe with foreign cars: Either the police stops the car, identifies the driver, issues the ticket and gets it paid or it ends being not economical to enforce it (more money spent in the proceedings than got with the ticket). It may suck, but that's life.