Changing driver behaviour

User avatar
Tinnishill
Posts: 235
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 9:58am

Changing driver behaviour

Post by Tinnishill »

Agitate, educate, organise.
Barks
Posts: 310
Joined: 14 Oct 2016, 5:27pm

Re: Changeing driver behaviour

Post by Barks »

I have always been a supporter of these average speed systems but the logical conclusion for me is that now that all cars can easily be fitted with ‘black boxes’ at very little cost we don’t need to spend public money on any more street infrastructure to achieve the effect that ‘if you speed you will be penalised’ (be that by fines or hikes in insurance costs) which is the only way to influence so many drivers on our roads.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Changeing driver behaviour

Post by mjr »

Barks wrote:I have always been a supporter of these average speed systems but the logical conclusion for me is that now that all cars can easily be fitted with ‘black boxes’ at very little cost we don’t need to spend public money on any more street infrastructure to achieve the effect that ‘if you speed you will be penalised’ (be that by fines or hikes in insurance costs) which is the only way to influence so many drivers on our roads.

So would you trust the output of a user-modifiable device (speedometers have to be adjusted for wheel size, amongst other things, GPS devices can be fooled if you know how) or attempt the technological futility of criminalising people who make certain changes to machines they own but not do anything to try to detect those changes?

Laws didn't even stop actual vehicle manufacturers from disabling something as integral as emissions controls at the factory. What chance is there of stopping speeders from modifying black boxes?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Changeing driver behaviour

Post by [XAP]Bob »

mjr wrote:
Barks wrote:I have always been a supporter of these average speed systems but the logical conclusion for me is that now that all cars can easily be fitted with ‘black boxes’ at very little cost we don’t need to spend public money on any more street infrastructure to achieve the effect that ‘if you speed you will be penalised’ (be that by fines or hikes in insurance costs) which is the only way to influence so many drivers on our roads.

So would you trust the output of a user-modifiable device (speedometers have to be adjusted for wheel size, amongst other things, GPS devices can be fooled if you know how) or attempt the technological futility of criminalising people who make certain changes to machines they own but not do anything to try to detect those changes?

Laws didn't even stop actual vehicle manufacturers from disabling something as integral as emissions controls at the factory. What chance is there of stopping speeders from modifying black boxes?


Assuming the black boxes are an MOTable item then you can make them tamper evident in software and hardware.

Compare it with the RasPi which has a 'has been overclocked' signal on the board. If you overclock the CPU then the signal is set, and you can't unset it (it is, IIRC, basically a fuse)
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Changeing driver behaviour

Post by mjr »

[XAP]Bob wrote:Assuming the black boxes are an MOTable item then you can make them tamper evident in software and hardware.

So? Would you scrap any car which has a replaced or adjusted black box?

[XAP]Bob wrote:Compare it with the RasPi which has a 'has been overclocked' signal on the board. If you overclock the CPU then the signal is set, and you can't unset it (it is, IIRC, basically a fuse)

Couldn't you just replace the fuse or even the RasPi?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by kwackers »

Most modern cars have cameras, GPS, mechanical speed measurement (i.e. wheel size), accelerometers, cellular comms, engine management software and a whole host of stuff that can be brought into play.

Technologies such as blockchain can be used to make it tamper proof - bar blowing it up but then you may as well pay the fine.

Tamper proof is doable, just requires political will.
Most systems are only designed to be tamper proof at a very basic level and even at that level not that many people bother.

(Not that I think such a device is necessarily the way forward).
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Changeing driver behaviour

Post by kwackers »

mjr wrote:Couldn't you just replace the fuse or even the RasPi?

Fuse is internal so no, but you could replace the RasPi - but then what's the point?
Replacing a black box is likely to be far more expensive than paying the fine!

The real way around such things is simply not to register the car in your name to start with.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by mjr »

kwackers wrote:Most modern cars have cameras, GPS, mechanical speed measurement (i.e. wheel size), accelerometers, cellular comms, engine management software and a whole host of stuff that can be brought into play.

I ask for evidence that this is the case. Some may, but I doubt it's most.

kwackers wrote:Technologies such as blockchain can be used to make it tamper proof - bar blowing it up but then you may as well pay the fine.

Tamper proof is doable, just requires political will.
Most systems are only designed to be tamper proof at a very basic level and even at that level not that many people bother.

It seems like a horrible nightmare world, legally preventing people from adapting, improving or possibly even repairing what they bought. I expect the manufacturers would be in favour because it would tie people to expensive main dealers even more.

I also think it's futile, like past attempts like DVD copy prevention. Humans are ingenious and will find either technological or social workarounds.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by kwackers »

mjr wrote:I ask for evidence that this is the case. Some may, but I doubt it's most.

Mechanical speed measurement, accelerometers and engine management exist on every car.

Cameras are fast finding their way onto most. Even a lot of fairly cheap cars now have anti-collision and lane drift capability provided by camera. Long before the tech mentioned in the OP exists all cars will have cameras.

GPS - you'd be hard pushed to find a car without sat nav these days, particularly as car displays move towards tablet formats.

Cellular comms. A lot of high end cars have this for such things as automatically calling emergency services etc in the event of an accident, it's another tech that's slowly moving down the food chain.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by mjr »

kwackers wrote:
mjr wrote:I ask for evidence that this is the case. Some may, but I doubt it's most.

Mechanical speed measurement, accelerometers and engine management exist on every car.

Which leaves all the other stuff...

kwackers wrote:Cameras are fast finding their way onto most. Even a lot of fairly cheap cars now have anti-collision and lane drift capability provided by camera. Long before the tech mentioned in the OP exists all cars will have cameras.

"A lot" is not "most" and "fast finding their way" is not now! I wouldn't even regard it as a lot, but that's a very subjective term so you might.

kwackers wrote:GPS - you'd be hard pushed to find a car without sat nav these days, particularly as car displays move towards tablet formats.

I refer you to the recent discussion where a similar claim was not proved: viewtopic.php?p=1266455#p1266455

Anyway, opinion is great, but I'd prefer some numbers. I strongly suspect that the number of new cars with cameras+GPS+cellular is well below 50% but I can't find the numbers. They don't seem to be in the gov.uk or SMMT published statistics. Model names is as good as it gets, but that earlier discussion shows that even under the same model name, some do and some don't, but there seems no way to say how many of each.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by kwackers »

mjr wrote:Anyway, opinion is great, but I'd prefer some numbers. I strongly suspect that the number of new cars with cameras+GPS+cellular is well below 50% but I can't find the numbers. They don't seem to be in the gov.uk or SMMT published statistics. Model names is as good as it gets, but that earlier discussion shows that even under the same model name, some do and some don't, but there seems no way to say how many of each.

I think you're getting too hung up on the numbers.

My point is there are several places available now to hang such technology and that number is going to go up not down.
If such tech was to become compulsory then by the time it happens engineers will be spoilt for choice.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by mjr »

kwackers wrote:I think you're getting too hung up on the numbers.

I'm actually getting hung up on misleading use of "most" to suggest this nightmare is just around the corner.

kwackers wrote:My point is there are several places available now to hang such technology and that number is going to go up not down.
If such tech was to become compulsory then by the time it happens engineers will be spoilt for choice.

I think moves to make such tech compulsory will be fought, not least by the more libertarian interests in the USA, plus I hope for market demand of simpler motor vehicles with fewer complicated unrepairable expensive parts. Already, there are plenty of critics of the embedded dangerous dashboard tablets, which gives hope for the future.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by kwackers »

mjr wrote:I'm actually getting hung up on misleading use of "most" to suggest this nightmare is just around the corner.

I don't think it is, nor do I think it'll happen at all.

IMO, a lot of safety devices will work their way down the food chain. Anti collision being an obvious one.
As vehicles become safer and kill fewer people political will for change reduces.

I'm all for simple vehicles. Renault Twizy for example - I'd have one but can't stomach the battery rental given I'd not use it that much (it's still more complex than a bicycle).
User avatar
Tinnishill
Posts: 235
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 9:58am

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by Tinnishill »

Back to my original post. Average speed cameras have reduced traffic speeding offences on the urban stretch of Dalkieth Road, Edinburgh, from 15,000 a day to 2. Not 2,000,you will notice, but 2. Serious injuries have dropped from about 3 per year to zero.

That is now, today, with current technology.
Agitate, educate, organise.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Changing driver behaviour

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Tinnishill wrote:Back to my original post. Average speed cameras have reduced traffic speeding offences on the urban stretch of Dalkieth Road, Edinburgh, from 15,000 a day to 2. Not 2,000,you will notice, but 2. Serious injuries have dropped from about 3 per year to zero.

That is now, today, with current technology.

Plus One if true
15 000 a day? Shame they were not caught and punished
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Post Reply