Jump to content

Featured Replies

we are aware of this, but

 

 

  • Replies 21.5k
  • Views 595.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • VanHammersly
    VanHammersly

  • While I disagree with Biden trying to save these idiots from themselves, it just proves what a wonderful human being he is. IMO we should encourage Trumpbots to all give each other Covid so they die o

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

If everyone suddenly switched to elec cars by end of year, we would grind to a halt, the cars, and infrastructure are not there to support that. 

It is better for this to happen organically rather than forcing it, but you cant stop politicians from trying to gun up the works. 

 

 

She said autonomous, not electric. Not quite the same thing.

6 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I'd hope its only a few people. In the age of Uber, there's no reason to get behind the wheel if you've had more than one or two drinks. 

The problem is that Uber isn't as widely available in some areas, people stupidly don't want to leave their vehicles behind especially if they have work the next day, and drunk people make bad decisions.  I don't know how I feel about a government mandated measure, but we have seatbelts and airbags so there is some precedent for it.  On the other hand MADD is a tad on the fanatical and looney side, so I don't know if everyone needs to be monitored over their rhetoric.

I just don't think the tech will be there in 5 years even to meet this: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired"

14 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I'd hope its only a few people. In the age of Uber, there's no reason to get behind the wheel if you've had more than one or two drinks. 

Yeah, they don’t have Uber in NEPA.  :whistle:

2 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

The problem is that Uber isn't as widely available in some areas, people stupidly don't want to leave their vehicles behind especially if they have work the next day, and drunk people make bad decisions.  I don't know how I feel about a government mandated measure, but we have seatbelts and airbags so there is some precedent for it.  On the other hand MADD is a tad on the fanatical and looney side, so I don't know if everyone needs to be monitored over their rhetoric.

Where can you not get an Uber at this point? I can get them in Delaware, FFS.

1 minute ago, Dave Moss said:

Yeah, they don’t have Uber in NEPA.  :whistle:

Well, then...move.

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I just don't think the tech will be there in 5 years even to meet this: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired"

Yeah. Keeping any system "passive", cost effective and having it work as intended seems like a stretch for 5 years.

Just now, vikas83 said:

Where can you not get an Uber at this point? I can get them in Delaware, FFS.

In some rural areas they are harder to come by.. if there are no drivers, there is nothing you can do.  People don't want to be Uber drivers in areas where they don't get much clientele and vice versa.  Anyway, even still drunk people do stupid ish.  Look at Ruggs. 

1 minute ago, Boogyman said:

Yeah. Keeping any system "passive", cost effective and having it work as intended seems like a stretch for 5 years.

Engineering triangle, pick two out of three, can't have all three.

7 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

The problem is that Uber isn't as widely available in some areas, people stupidly don't want to leave their vehicles behind especially if they have work the next day, and drunk people make bad decisions.  I don't know how I feel about a government mandated measure, but we have seatbelts and airbags so there is some precedent for it.  On the other hand MADD is a tad on the fanatical and looney side, so I don't know if everyone needs to be monitored over their rhetoric.

You guys think big brother is out to get you now, wait until you have cameras inside your cars watching you while you drive.

Just now, binkybink77 said:

In some rural areas they are harder to come by.. if there are no drivers, there is nothing you can do.  People don't want to be Uber drivers in areas where they don't get much clientele and vice versa.  Anyway, even still drunk people do stupid ish.  Look at Ruggs. 

And I'm sure putting in this technology that inconveniences everyone will totally make stupid people start acting responsibly. Better not drive drunk...my car might notice.

Morons will be morons no matter what we do. Impacting the lives of 99% of the population will have no impact. It's why strict gun laws don't stop gun violence -- cretins are cretins. 

8 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Yeah. Keeping any system "passive", cost effective and having it work as intended seems like a stretch for 5 years.

the problem is the "accurately identify"

something like this is just going to be really exposed to false positives IMHO. 

honestly, the false positives may end up being inattentive drivers. but I don't even like my car hitting the brakes for me as a "safety" feature, so I sure as hell don't want it misreading some behavior that may be an evasive maneuver and thinking "oh this guy's drunk better take the wheel"

2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

And I'm sure putting in this technology that inconveniences everyone will totally make stupid people start acting responsibly. Better not drive drunk...my car might notice.

Morons will be morons no matter what we do. Impacting the lives of 99% of the population will have no impact. It's why strict gun laws don't stop gun violence -- cretins are cretins. 

I mean, it won't make them act responsibly but it will disable their ability to drive.. which they kind of deserve.  If the technology is sound, I don't really have a problem with it because it shouldn't impact those of us that aren't driving impaired.  Hell it would probably eliminate a lot of older people who are FAR past the time they should be on the road by reading them as impaired.  But I don't know enough about it to say whether it's capable of being that reliable.   Like I said in a previous post - let's just get to driverless cars because I'm on board with grabbing my latte and having my car drive me to work while I log into the board and roast you idiots during my morning commute.  

8 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

In some rural areas they are harder to come by.. if there are no drivers, there is nothing you can do.  People don't want to be Uber drivers in areas where they don't get much clientele and vice versa.  Anyway, even still drunk people do stupid ish.  Look at Ruggs. 

hell I'm not even in a particularly rural area and they're hard to come by. if I want to have date night with the wife with unconstrained drinking I need to spend about $30 each way to go 10 miles. 

Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

hell I'm not even in a particularly rural area and they're hard to come by. if I want to have date night with the wife with unconstrained drinking I need to spend about $30 each way to go 10 miles. 

I mean, do I have to say it?

...

Try being less poor.

3 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

the problem is the "accurately identify"

something like this is just going to be really exposed to false positives IMHO. 

honestly, the false positives may end up being inattentive drivers. but I don't even like my car hitting the brakes for me as a "safety" feature, so I sure as hell don't want it misreading some behavior that may be an evasive maneuver and thinking "oh this guy's drunk better take the wheel"

Yea that's why I said "as intended" . It's not gonna happen.

4 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I mean, do I have to say it?

...

Try being less poor.

lol, true enough. I don't mind the cost that much, but it used to be like $12. 

I'm not Vikas rich but like you my goal was to make enough that I didn't worry about it. but I still notice both the service difference and cost. 

prior to the pandemic I could order an Uber and it'd reliably pick me up at my house or the restaurant within 10-15 mins. now? maybe I get one from home, maybe not, and if we're out late there's real risk that you just won't get an Uber to pick you up from the restaurant at all. 

Also, Ubers are often gross and smelly.. you really need to not be so poor that you can afford a personal driver in a luxury vehicle with a partition so you don't have to talk to him. 

4 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

Also, Ubers are often gross and smelly.. you really need to not be so poor that you can afford a personal driver in a luxury vehicle with a partition so you don't have to talk to him. 

I've never taken an UberX. Only Uber Black. Actually, I did once and it reeked of weed. Never again.

If I'm going to a meeting or the airport (and always airport pickup), I use a car service - usually Carey. But most Uber Black's are from car service companies -- just guys moonlighting. In LA they are almost all SUVs.

Personally, I take a helicopter everywhere I go

Latest Beastie Boys GIFs | Gfycat

17 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Personally, I take a helicopter everywhere I go

That's a red line for me. You couldn't pay me enough to get on one of those and go out like Kobe.

  • Author

Like possession charges, DUI fines/restitution are  a huge cash cow for the states and their police forces. If we ever actually eliminated drunk driving, I honestly wonder how they'd function without the revenue. They're gonna make up the difference somewhere.

27 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

That's a red line for me. You couldn't pay me enough to get on one of those and go out like Kobe.

Glad I'm not the only one. 

30 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

That's a red line for me. You couldn't pay me enough to get on one of those and go out like Kobe.

Gun to your head. Helicopter or have Lynched drop you off in the morning on his way to work?

Create an account or sign in to comment