Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here. You might wish everybody was well aware of their environment, but the fact is, a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to.
The second point is completely off-topic, as the car in question had plenty of space between them and the Google car's rear-end. It just failed to notice it was not moving.
The last point is already addressed in my previous comment: a solid brake light is much less noticeable than a brake light coming on. In some countries in Europe it's relatively common to have blinking brake lights, but I don't think that's the case in the US.
These points are just basic human behaviour, and they aren't going away, no matter how contemptuous you are and how much you look down on other people.
>Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here.
This is bad driving. You use the brake lights (and if you haven't seen the break lights working, you use the visual speed til you confirm the break lights are working) to determine of a car is going to stop. You should never put yourself in a position where any other factors are involved in if the car in front of you will stop or not.
> a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to.
And such drivers are to be held responsible for crashes and should be educated when found. Those who do not change should lose the privilege of driving.
Green light are dubious, you don't know how long until they shift, and thus you 'really should' decelerate a bit (driving school talk). With clearer signs, you could at least not fear having to stop in emergency. But even then, that won't stop someone to cross his red light ...
Roads signs are like compiler warnings, it's all cute and nice, but it's just characters on the screen anyone can physically ignore. Let's have roads with nasty speed bumps before all intersections, which are all annoying, impossible to cross fast, roundabouts. #haskell
> Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here.
er:
> The lane to the left of the Google AV was a left-turn-only
lane. The vehicle waiting immediately behind the Google AV in the straight-only lane began to move forward
when the green arrow left turn signal appeared (despite the signal for the straight-only lane remaining red)
and collided with the rear bumper of the Google AV.
>Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here. You might wish everybody was well aware of their environment, but the fact is, a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to.
Watch the video. The self-driving car braked because the two cars in front of it did.
Hmm... of course it did. It's not a human. The green light vs. stopped traffic can't mislead it the same way a human can be misled through inattention.
The car behind the self-driving car didn't stop though, which lead to the incident. Presumably because it didn't pay attention to the fact that the cars in front were not moving despite the green light.
I'm not sure I understand where this thread is leading.
> GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right and give way to pedestrians who are crossing"
You seem to be saying that people are shitty drivers and that we need to either just put up with it, or fit our cars to stop some careless inattentive idiot from driving into us.
Your argument is essentially against all forms of safety equipment that protect against being rear-ended, and can be used without substantial modification to argue against safety equipment of all kinds: why bother with crumple zones when I could just insist everyone else on the road were better? The reality is that I am in the car being hit, there is little to nothing I can do to make people not hit me at some point in my life (and to this date, I have been in a car rear-ended twice; in both situations the person behind us was 100% at fault under essentially any useful definition of "at fault"), and so I have a budget I am willing to spend on random safety equipment to make me less likely to be injured when this happens. I already am spending a lot of money on safety features for my car: at least these ones sound cheap to add.
And you should always drive at the speed limit and come to a complete stop at stop signs. And yellow does not mean accelerate.
Lots of non-shitty drivers do not follow every road rule to the letter under every circumstance and, indeed, it's not always possible to especially without pissing off everyone around you.
I actually agree with the basic point that it's the following driver who has 99% of the responsibility not to run into the car ahead. That said, there are plenty of behaviors like coming to unnecessarily abrupt stops in unexpected places (which I'm not saying is the case here) that will absolutely lead to people running into you.
There's two things, bad people and bad drivers. Schools can only teach proper driving, not proper behavior. And schools are doing a sub-par job IMO. There are so many things you are not taught there or are in a hand-wavy fashion.
The second point is completely off-topic, as the car in question had plenty of space between them and the Google car's rear-end. It just failed to notice it was not moving.
The last point is already addressed in my previous comment: a solid brake light is much less noticeable than a brake light coming on. In some countries in Europe it's relatively common to have blinking brake lights, but I don't think that's the case in the US.
These points are just basic human behaviour, and they aren't going away, no matter how contemptuous you are and how much you look down on other people.