this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
157 points (95.9% liked)

News

23259 readers
3184 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Transportation Department projects the new rule could save 360 lives a year and prevent 24,000 injuries.

The Biden administration plans to require that all new cars and trucks come with pedestrian-collision avoidance systems that include automatic emergency braking technology by the end of the decade.

In an interview, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the requirement is designed to reduce pedestrian deaths, which have been on the rise in the post-Covid 19 era.

The new standards will require all cars to avoid contact at up to 62 mph and mandate that they must be able to detect pedestrians in the dark. They will also require braking at up to 45 mph when a pedestrian is detected.  

The Transportation Department projects the rule could save 360 lives a year and prevent 24,000 injuries.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fireweed@lemmy.world 48 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Or we could regulate vehicle size and reduce speed limits, two things actually proven to reduce pedestrian fatalities and that could be implemented today without waiting on future technological advancements

¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 36 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Speed limits suck at slowing people down. It's much more effective to change the size and shape of roads. Slimmer roads, with roundabout's and more pedestrian right of ways slow down cars.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

They just made a 6 lane road that goes through commercial strip mall type area 30km/h when it used to be 50km/h. It's for like 4 blocks with 50km/h on either side. Lights at all intersections.

NO ONE goes 30km/h there, it's the most insane thing ever.

Side streets with no speed limits (which here makes it 50km/h) thats usually way too fast and most people will naturally go slower than 50 but not gonna lie, 30km/h on some of those also seems excessive.

Add some speed bumps, narrow the street by adding side walks on both sides, and suddenly 30 feels fine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] perviouslyiner@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Don't even need to reduce size - just reduce hood height (especially when it is unused space for "aesthetics")

[–] Delusional@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (2 children)

And the technology sucks. I bought a new Subaru last year that has the auto-braking, it activated twice when it didn't need to at all so I shut it off every time because it's a fucking hazard.

[–] DdCno1@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago

Seems like you're unlucky. Subaru's system is generally considered one of the best in the industry, routinely outperforming the competition.

[–] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Separate question, but what model and year? I’m considering a new forester to replace my 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 26 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Car hoods are getting higher and higher, which makes hitting a pedestrian much more lethal than before.

The shape of smaller (sane) car is made specifically to be aerodynamic, and to also ensure the impact mostly happens at the legs and raise the pedestrian to minimize damage and hopefully avoid running over them. Those mastodons on the streets are insane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpuX-5E7xoU

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Fuck cars (and trucks especially!)

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 24 points 6 months ago

In the UK pedestrian car collisions are falling, despite increased amounts of cars and distances walked. In the US pedestrian collisions are at high.

I don't think it's the safety features in cars that matter here. Similar features are going to be present in the UK as the US. People in the US are buying bigger and bigger trucks. They also have less walkable cities (this could also improve in the UK). They should be taxing larger vehicles more. Get them off the road, they have larger blind spots and greater injury on impact.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I look forward to finding out if it actually helps or makes things worse as people rely more and more on safety features instead of paying attention while driving. I find drivers are far more distracted and driving dangerously today than 20 years ago, almost always staring at phones or those giant consoles they insist on putting in every vehicle.

Maybe a long term outcome will be better sensor tech that puts us closer to fully automated driving.

[–] ares35@kbin.social 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

at least half the drivers (out of the many) that don't stop at the crosswalk i'm trying to use on my way to or from the office (my commute is a short walk. the street is the 'main drag' in a small town's downtown) either have their phone in their hands or are looking down (and i can't actually see the phone).

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 3 points 6 months ago

Two words: Water balloons.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I do not think we will have anything approaching truly safe fully automated driving outside of limited areas for a long time. There are just too many unknown variables to account for that a creatively-thinking human brain can respond to better.

I can certainly think of a time I've gotten out of a crash through some creative driving on my part. I'm sure others can too.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 5 points 6 months ago

Human experience can be better in some circumstances and automated is better in others. I wouldn't expect an automated driving system to handle off roading where experience fills in a lot of unknown details. But humans are not able to pay 100% attention all the time and make basic mistakes.

Eventually automated driving will end up being safer overall, just like with autopilot in planes, but the complexity of driving on the ground means we will need a combination of better road markings, better road design, and a lot of time to refine both the training algorithms and develop better processing abilities to keep up with the complexity. At some point the design defects will lead to fewer mistskes than human error in cities, but I see that as decades down the road since the companies involved have already been blatantly lying about their issues.

What I would like to see is first (in the US) is a focus on being able to use full automation on interstate highways. This would massively help with driving fatigue for truckers and people on long trips in a controllled environment with few pedestrians. It would also be a great training ground for avoiding large mammals like deer that can be as unpredictable as humans. Then expand to regular highways, and eventually imto cities. Starting with cities was basically shooting themselves in the foot, especially if the reason was lower speeds while not balancing that benefit against the complexity of urban roads.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Only 7 years behind the EU this time. That's getting better! Now do adaptive headlights...

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)
[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago

That's a good first step. I want to see them made mandatory.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This reminds me of an argument I once had with a friend about seat belts. He kept pointing to NTSB statistics about vehicle collision mortality saying that seatbelts aren't necessary because mortality without seatbelts has fallen steeply since the 80's. And while he was right, he didn't understand that the mortality rates dropping were due to advances in medical science as well as other vehicle safety features, vehicular legislation, and road designs. It was like arguing with a mud pile, so frustrating. The stats didn't include the number of people who had survived but were paralyzed, or disfigured, or otherwise faced some major life-altering injury.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

24,000 injuries.

[–] Jeanschyso@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

That's not gonna do more than a drop in the bucket. Y'all's government thinks tech can fix something that good pedestrian-first infrastructure should fix. That's kinda wack.

Vehicle sizes, hood clearance, non-car-centric infrastructure mandates, that's the sort of things rules should include. Not "let's have AI decide if the pedestrian or cyclist lives"

load more comments
view more: next ›