Although I have mixed feelings about the idea of that level of external control, having a speed limiter in a car can be very helpful in keeping to low speed limits when you want to. Because most cars "want" to go faster, it can take an unreasonable amount of concentration to keep the speed below a slow limit such as 30 or 40 km/h.
I have used a cruise control to do that, and to allow me the chance to look around instead of looking constantly at the speedometer. It made driving much less stressful as well as safer.
But the cruise ontrols I have used have been cumbersome in that context. A speed limiter could help greatly and having it adapt automatically to the prevailing limit would also be helpful.
It is cute that some drivers resent that as state control when so many drive cars with automatic transmission, automatic ignition advance, automatic fuel mixture control, anti-lock brakes and so many other technologies that deprive them of direct control. Perrhaps even steering, acceleration and braking "by wire" (i.e. without direct driver control with everything mediated by the computer). Plus car management systems that record their driving for later retrieval in the workshop or even by the manufacturer or government authorities. Most drivers also carry mobile phones that are powerful tracking devices.
Speed limiters do more than limit speeds. They allow the driver to concentrate on other things than whether they are at or above the speed limit. That can make driving more pleasant as well as safer for both occupants and those outside the car.
IMO speeding in this way kind of resembles the “rape, incest, and ME” mindset of abortion rights. People think they should be able to speed whenever they want, but frown on others doing so outside of circumstances they personally approve of.
The National Transportation Safety Board has determined that speeding is a cause of as many accidents as impaired driving. We spend enormous amounts of money on speed monitoring, enforcement, court costs, mitigations like signs, speed bumps, road diets, and still most people admit to speeding. At what point will we face the fact that we simply think our right to ignore speed limits is more important than efforts to save lives, injuries, and property damage? At least the failure to address gun deaths can be laid mostly at the feet of money in politics. Speeding is something we do volunarily. Either by not paying attention (which is in no small part the failure of AASHTO to actually embrace safety) or intentionally, as the saying goes "we have seen the problem, and he is us".
ISA does not need to be "Orwellian". The car just needs to know where it is and the speed limit for that location. Tracking logs are a complete side issue to functional ISA.
I like ISA because it means speed enforcement is disengaged from police enforcement bias and claims of revenue raising. In this respect ISA means the state is even less engaged In day to day speed management.
The status quo however could be described as dystopically Malthusianism a real world version of Logans Run pruning children, elderly and others indiscriminately from the population.
ISA should be mandatory on all vehicles not just recidivist driverts. Or sedans only ( end the SUV loopholes) It is the next vehicle safety progression after seat belt, crumple zone, AEB and blindzone elimination.
For real. Every once in a while I look at my car’s speedometer and think, That’s insane. In theory, it tops out at 120 or something. It’s a 4-cylinder hatchback. C’mon. No way should it ever need to do anything more than 75-80. Max.
Although I have mixed feelings about the idea of that level of external control, having a speed limiter in a car can be very helpful in keeping to low speed limits when you want to. Because most cars "want" to go faster, it can take an unreasonable amount of concentration to keep the speed below a slow limit such as 30 or 40 km/h.
I have used a cruise control to do that, and to allow me the chance to look around instead of looking constantly at the speedometer. It made driving much less stressful as well as safer.
But the cruise ontrols I have used have been cumbersome in that context. A speed limiter could help greatly and having it adapt automatically to the prevailing limit would also be helpful.
It is cute that some drivers resent that as state control when so many drive cars with automatic transmission, automatic ignition advance, automatic fuel mixture control, anti-lock brakes and so many other technologies that deprive them of direct control. Perrhaps even steering, acceleration and braking "by wire" (i.e. without direct driver control with everything mediated by the computer). Plus car management systems that record their driving for later retrieval in the workshop or even by the manufacturer or government authorities. Most drivers also carry mobile phones that are powerful tracking devices.
Speed limiters do more than limit speeds. They allow the driver to concentrate on other things than whether they are at or above the speed limit. That can make driving more pleasant as well as safer for both occupants and those outside the car.
IMO speeding in this way kind of resembles the “rape, incest, and ME” mindset of abortion rights. People think they should be able to speed whenever they want, but frown on others doing so outside of circumstances they personally approve of.
The National Transportation Safety Board has determined that speeding is a cause of as many accidents as impaired driving. We spend enormous amounts of money on speed monitoring, enforcement, court costs, mitigations like signs, speed bumps, road diets, and still most people admit to speeding. At what point will we face the fact that we simply think our right to ignore speed limits is more important than efforts to save lives, injuries, and property damage? At least the failure to address gun deaths can be laid mostly at the feet of money in politics. Speeding is something we do volunarily. Either by not paying attention (which is in no small part the failure of AASHTO to actually embrace safety) or intentionally, as the saying goes "we have seen the problem, and he is us".
ISA does not need to be "Orwellian". The car just needs to know where it is and the speed limit for that location. Tracking logs are a complete side issue to functional ISA.
I like ISA because it means speed enforcement is disengaged from police enforcement bias and claims of revenue raising. In this respect ISA means the state is even less engaged In day to day speed management.
The status quo however could be described as dystopically Malthusianism a real world version of Logans Run pruning children, elderly and others indiscriminately from the population.
ISA should be mandatory on all vehicles not just recidivist driverts. Or sedans only ( end the SUV loopholes) It is the next vehicle safety progression after seat belt, crumple zone, AEB and blindzone elimination.
That is an important point. I do like speed limiters that allow me to concentrate on the circumstances instead of on the speedometer.
It is only the issue of further surveillance that makes me uneasy about it.
Why were cars ever allowed to go above the maximum legal speed limit of 80mph?
Maximum speed limit where? Not all places have speed limits.
It may be reasonable not to drive faster than that but it is not the legal limit everywhere.
For real. Every once in a while I look at my car’s speedometer and think, That’s insane. In theory, it tops out at 120 or something. It’s a 4-cylinder hatchback. C’mon. No way should it ever need to do anything more than 75-80. Max.
Kids: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMfNAGP-iqfiC8j0o4t-C1b6D0-AnlpEZ&si=dvd6kBdL4CritqsI
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMfNAGP-iqfhSodZr8JiSf3PlVNbPeP0m&si=Eab3u9J82Bz33tir
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMfNAGP-iqfjctZ2JAq2MQ4X3Gqch2tG3&si=ZYn2EmUlC7AE3mF-