this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
257 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

59593 readers
3380 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Drivers Tend To Kill Pedestrians At Night. Thermal Imaging May Help.::Pedestrian automatic emergency braking (AEB), which may become mandatory on U.S. cars in the future, tends to not perform well in the dark.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you cannot drive safely around pedestrians in normal street clothes, you should not be driving. You are the one bringing a lethal machine into the equation, they're just out living.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then please enlighten me as to how you manipulate the laws of physics to increase the reflectivity of clothing while your night vision is impaired by all the headlights at face level angles too far to the left?

Defensive driving is acknowledging problems and trying to mitigate them. Stupidity is pretending there isn't one

[–] justJanne@startrek.website 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The law says, regardless of the speed limit, you need to be driving slow enough to react to someone suddenly stepping on the road. If you can't do that while driving at the speed limit, you'll just have to drive slower.

[–] nevemsenki@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The law says, regardless of the speed limit, you need to be driving slow enough to react to someone suddenly stepping on the road. If you can’t do that while driving at the speed limit, you’ll just have to drive slower.

Taken literally, that means that since you won't be able to stop if someone steps just in front of your vehicle, you should never drive faster than ~10kmph. Which can be a valid interpretation, but I doubt it's going to be a widely accepted one. For example at least where I live, if someone steps in front a vehicle within breaking distance driving at the speed of the road's legal limit, both pedestrian and driver will share responsibility (the exact ratios being determined by the exact situation).

[–] justJanne@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you actually think about it, it's absolutely makes sense. The Autobahn has additional stopping lanes for broken down cars and several meters of grass to each side, which means you can safely drive hundreds of kilometers an hour while still being able to see obstructions early enough to brake in time.

Slower motorways have smaller setbacks, but still enough to keep their speeds.

City streets where you can't see people entering the road in time to brake usually have relatively low speed limits to reduce the braking distance as well as the damage caused by a collision.

But if the visibility or braking distance are affected due to weather or broken streetlamps, it's up to you to slow down accordingly. But even for situations like that traffic planners usually add additional signs, it's common to see roads with signs that say

/❄️\
(60)

to warn people to drive slower when the road is freezing or signs that say

/🦌\
(50)
[400m]

to warn of crossing animals in the next 400m and set a lower speed limit.

The same obviously applies when it's not crossing deer but crossing pedestrians.

[–] LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not how that shit works. At all.

First, throwing out generic legal advice is dumb. It's not consistent in any way. Second, in most states and countries you'd have to prove negligence. You absolutely will not and should not be held responsible if some idiot runs out between two cars and gets hit while you are following the law.

[–] justJanne@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually, in EU countries the law explicitly says you have to drive slow enough to react to unexpected changes on the road. If you as a driver hit something or someone, you are automatically at fault because you violated that law. There is an incredibly high burden of proof required to not be at fault as a driver.

But that's usually not an issue, because road planners are only allowed to set speed limits that are low enough that drivers can actually react to unexpected changes. Which is why e.g. the Autobahn has a separate lane for broken down vehicles and significant setbacks and green areas to both sides of the road so you can see from a long distance away if something is in the road.

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Drive slower, or walk yourself if you can't see well enough to drive.

[–] brunofin@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Sure but people can be a little more sensible to think not to dress as a fucking ninja at night and expect to be seen?

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You clearly have never driven at night.

Edit: Also, the idiot wearing dark clothes walking into a road at night will still be just as dead whether the driver is considered culpable or not.

As a motorcyclist of 30+ years, this is a rule you either learn early or pay the price.