Smart Technology

[Sharky]

Just been listening to the Pro's and cons for legalising electric scooters. Those against are saying that scooters will be everywhere, causing obstructions to pedestrians etc. Those for, are saying that smart technology can restrict scooters to certain pathways and speed limits.

To me it seems all a bit unbalanced. The same technology could be used to prevent cars from speeding or being in the wrong place. Doesn't seem to be a problem using it in car parks and toll tunnels etc. But everybody is happy with cars exceeding limits.

 

[Drago]

Coulda, woulda, shoulda...people talk a good fight, but when such technology seems imminent they squeal.

Its like the impending mandatory speed limiters on new cars. Great. Exceot youll be able to override them by mashing hard on the acdelerator and activating a switch, just in case the person you're overtaking speeds up. Four issues there:

1. If the inside vehicle us also strictly limited, how would they speed up?

2. With the override function, there is nithing stopping the inside cqr from speeding up as well.

3. 40 years of experience with LGV speed limiting has shown there is simply no need for an override system. Casualty rates fell steadily and dramatically without it.

4. Id you're limited, and the car you're overtaking is likited, and you're both close to that limit already, then why would any sane person be wanting to overtake?

Society in general is all for this sort of restriction, until it looks like its about to apply to them personally. A that point they squeal about civil liberties and it gets watered down or scrapped altogether. I think its certainly a sound point from which to start investigating the potential at least, but if it ever got anywhere near application it would either get watered down or binned off entirely...or simply ignored. Visit any ebike forum to see the many threads from people wanting to derestict their legal ebikes, and I doubt scooter owners will be any less inclined to tinker.

 

[TheDoctor]

What 'smart tech' could they use? GPS is accurate to about 10 feet, and Galileo will only be accurate to about 3 feet.

 

[numbnuts]

I would love a escooter, and if I rode one the same way as I ride my etrike I would not be a problem to anyone, I'm quite happy with the legal speed at 15.5mph and with very small wheels I don't thing I would want to go any faster. If I were to get one it would have to have a 10 inch wheel that's for sure.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

Coulda, woulda, shoulda...people talk a good fight, but when such technology seems imminent they squeal.

Its like the impending mandatory speed limiters on new cars. Great. Exceot youll be able to override them by mashing hard on the acdelerator and activating a switch, just in case the person you're overtaking speeds up. Four issues there:

1. If the inside vehicle us also strictly limited, how would they speed up?

2. With the override function, there is nithing stopping the inside cqr from speeding up as well.

3. 40 years of experience with LGV speed limiting has shown there is simply no need for an override system. Casualty rates fell steadily and dramatically without it.

4. Id you're limited, and the car you're overtaking is likited, and you're both close to that limit already, then why would any sane person be wanting to overtake?

Society in general is all for this sort of restriction, until it looks like its about to apply to them personally. A that point they squeal about civil liberties and it gets watered down or scrapped altogether. I think its certainly a sound point from which to start investigating the potential at least, but if it ever got anywhere near application it would either get watered down or binned off entirely...or simply ignored. Visit any ebike forum to see the many threads from people wanting to derestict their legal ebikes, and I doubt scooter owners will be any less inclined to tinker.

Not disputing your points, but it does raise another in my mind.

It's not 'speed' that's the issue, it's excessive speed in the wrong situation, and a limiter will do nothing to prevent that in many situations, especially the urban environment most people do their little bit of driving...or scooting, to stay on topic.

 

[Eric Olthwaite]

Just been listening to the Pro's and cons for legalising electric scooters. Those against are saying that scooters will be everywhere, causing obstructions to pedestrians etc.

If scooters are "everywhere", presumably there will be no pedestrians left, because they are all on scooters?

 

[Tenkaykev]

They've recently started an Electric scooter Hire scheme here in Poole. They're to supplement the "Beryl" Bike hire scheme which has been running for some time. I first noticed a couple in a bay yesterday evening, though I've seen a couple of people wizz past the house on Electric Scooters, whether or not they were from the hire scheme I don't know.
It's a Trial scheme at the moment, here's an excerpt from their website:


To ride a Beryl e-Scooter you must:

• Have a UK-valid driving licence or provisional licence
  Be aged 16 or older
• Have registered for an account via the Beryl app
• Only ride in cycle lanes or on the road

You must not:

• Register with another person’s driving licence
• Ride on the pavements or anywhere indoors
• Ride using someone else’s Beryl account
• Ride with a passenger
• Ride under the influence of alcohol or drugs

Remember to remove headphones or earpods. Wear a helmet, and clothing that you can be seen in that is not restrictive, allowing you to look over your shoulder

You can ride a Beryl e-Scooter anywhere that bikes are allowed. We recommend riding the e-scooter in designated bike lanes.

 

[gzoom]

To me it seems all a bit unbalanced. The same technology could be used to prevent cars from speeding or being in the wrong place. Doesn't seem to be a problem using it in car parks and toll tunnels etc. But everybody is happy with cars exceeding limits.

If autonomous technology can be achieved (I don't think its that far off), than cars running red lights/exceeding speed limits will be consigned to the history books.

The 'Autopilot' software in Teslas already will NOT allow the car to travel above the posted speed limit unless there is very specific human input to over-ride the software. The though car collects all this data, including a 360 degree recording of its surrounding, so if there was an accident and the data shows the human operator choose to break the speed limit than the insurance companies could easily say the driver invalidated their insurance cover by their actions. Ofcourse people will still drive around with no insurance, but for the majority IF THE SOFTWARE IS GOOD ENOUGH, the implications of breaking the speed limit and therefore invalidating your insurance is probably enough to mean 30mph might actually mean 30mph!!

Unlike humans the software also doesn't get angry at tailgaters, nor fussed about been 'cut up' etc. Removing humans from driving is next major step in road safety. I welcome it with open arms, and cannot wait. For those who still want to 'drive' it'll be like riding a horse, ofcourse you can, but you will have to pay for the privilege.

 

[annedonnelly]

The e-scooter trial has been running in Newcastle for a while now. I've not been in town so not seen it.

But they are constantly refining the rules & the technology seems to let them impose new restrictions instantly. They've recently imposed a curfew and some no-parking zones. Some info here

 

[richtea]

Unlike humans the software also doesn't get angry at tailgaters, nor fussed about been 'cut up' etc. Removing humans from driving is next major step in road safety. I welcome it with open arms, and cannot wait.

To make you even safer we, the government, have decided that it's no longer legal for humans to drive. Still OK with you?
Actually, it turns out that it's even safer if you keep your travelling to a minimum, so we'd like you to apply for each trip. So much safer. Still OK?

With freedom comes responsibility. Or in your case, less responsibility means less freedom.

Where do you draw your line?

 

[gzoom]

To make you even safer we, the government, have decided that it's no longer legal for humans to drive. Still OK with you?
Actually, it turns out that it's even safer if you keep your travelling to a minimum, so we'd like you to apply for each trip. So much safer. Still OK?

With freedom comes responsibility. Or in your case, less responsibility means less freedom.

Where do you draw your line?

The line is decided by risk and money not social policing.

IF autonomous driving is deemed/proven to be x10 'safer' than human drivers, its the insurance company that will determine the 'costs' of human drivers.

I doubt anyone will be 'banned' from driving a car, but it may turn out that if you choose to operate a 2ton+ machine capable of 0-60 time in 5 seconds your self, than your insurance costs will be x10 higher than someone choosing to use that machine but operated by software.

The key word though at present is IF