Drivers Tend To Kill Pedestrians At Night. Thermal Imaging May Help.::Pedestrian automatic emergency braking (AEB), which may become mandatory on U.S. cars in the future, tends to not perform well in the dark.

84 points

Drivers Tend To Kill Pedestrians At Night. Thermal Imaging May Help.

Yes, I need more incentives to kill pedestrians.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

LOL yes. Even the first sentence in this headline reads funny on its own.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Thermal imaging can help to shift those killings to daytime!

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points

What if we reduced the size of cars, reduced speed limits and created cities and towns that are safer to walk in

permalink
report
reply
29 points

Also, increase public transit options & availability.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

No thats communism

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Yep! America: Of the Cars, By the Cars, For the Cars

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I mean, long term that’s a fantastic solution. Pretty sure this change can be implemented a lot sooner and a LOT cheaper, and save lives tho.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Limit the speed of private vehicles mechanically, the same way they do with ebikes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

100%

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Funfact! Can’t be bothered to look it up but I remember reading that lower speed limits actually make people more prone to speed. In most cases, if speed limit is low, people will try their best to hit it and even slightly go over it. In higher speed limits people tend to actually drive slower than speed limit dictates.

This does, however, only apply to express ways and similiar, not city’s limits…I mean, people are still gonna try to max their speed but I really don’t think we can put it high enough for this to not apply and be safe anyway.

Also, how the hell do americans have this problem when their cities spend 2/3 of the day being locked in slow moving traffic? .-.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Adjusting a speed limit is not enough, road engineers need to implement actual traffic calming measures to slow people down…

Fun fact, US pedestrian deaths went up during covid because there were fewer drivers and people could speed more easily.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

In my country speeding cams work kinda well. People cry af about them but it’s almost funny seeing traffic suddenly slow down in certain points.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

It will help with pedestrian accidents but it will also be terrible for driving since you cannot reduce the distance between cities/commute length

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’d rather commuting take longer if less people die. But that’s just me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s the usual sentiment in social media comments but in reality most people don’t behave this way. We need to live in the real world if we want to change it. Living a delusion and expecting others to support it is not going to help in reality.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I mean until recently more people used to die in car accidents than by gunfire. It was the leading cause for kids. I am not advocating for lack of concern. But making cars less useful it’s not a solution since people still have to commute long distances in some countries. You have to weigh the benefits against the costs. If you believe that pedestrians should always be prioritized then you should be advocating for a complete ban on cars

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Good.

Maybe we’ll start designing our cities and lives for shorter commutes, benefiting ourselves and our environment? Might just be me tho.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Absolutely. ignoring the issue is not going to help. not sure how we can pressure “city designers” (no clue how it actually works) to effect the change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

In IIHS’ latest tests of car headlight systems, fewer than half (43%) earned a good rating. […] “Vehicles that earn a good rating for visibility in our tests have 23% fewer nighttime pedestrian crashes than those that rate poor.”

That’s a lot of room for improvement without new technology.

permalink
report
reply
27 points

It’s the kind of thing you assume would have been empirically tested and have minimum safety regulations, instead of the wild variability we see from dimly lit up close to blinding pulsar from alpha centauri.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

There is a minimum and regulations, in the US IIRC the legal range is between 500 and 3000 lumens. And it results in exactly what you describe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Exactly.

We need to have regs targeting specific performance metrics based on testing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Europe actually has incredible adaptive headlight technology that AFAIK was illegal in the US up until very recently. It’ll be great to see this rolled out here as it’s better for everyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Do we? I think they’re really annoying, blinding the shit outta me, then finally adjusting correctly just right before we pass each other.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m curious what their “good” rating entails. Hopefully not just brighter lights, that just makes oncoming traffic blind. That could end up being more dangerous overall, even if it’s not the car with “good” headlights doing the killing. Realistically, if you’re going to walk at night somewhere there are cars, wear a light, high vis vest, reflectors, SOMETHING.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

We have the tech, what needs to improve are regulations based on performance instead of tech.

That would leave room for innovative design that achieves the performance requirements.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

hmm thermal imaging in cars… or just more public transit and street lighting… give me the expensive capitalist hellcreating thing

permalink
report
reply
9 points

That only works in more urban areas.

Its impossible to covered every road in lights and it can get very dark when you are far away from a city. Same with public transit. I am all for it, but it’s only reasonable in more densely populated areas. There just won’t be enough people using it in th middle of nowhere to just something like that much less staff it.

Meanwhile helping cars see people even in those less common and more difficult situations is a good thing. Why would you NOT want your car to be safer for others around you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

80% of the US population, and about half of the world population, lives in urban areas.

By 2050, those figures will be 90% and 75%, respectively.

Planning better urban areas won’t help everyone, but it will help the supermajority.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Awww shit bois the huge country with plenty of money cannot afford to do it

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

IMO, I don’t think it matters whether we can or can’t. I don’t think we should even if we could. Light pollution from cities is bad enough. Adding that many more lights would make it so much worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Where do you think people lived during westward expansion when every town was connected by rail? There weren’t too many urban places out there.

It’s a myth that it only works for urban areas. Switzerland has their trains travel to basically every town on time and frequently, and those towns in the alps are sure as hell a lot harder to reach than whatever rural place you’re thinking of. Admittedly, getting from the station to your destination will be harder without a car until things are built or changed to replace car dependence, but car dependence was manufactured, not intrinsic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Right. I can’t wait for the thermal camera on my ridiculously expensive car to break so it can become a lawn ornament until I spend thousands on a new camera.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m all for more public transport but I’m also all for improving safety features for pedestrians. Not sure why anyone would be against putting the cost on car owners.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

People could also wear something other than black clothes when they go outside at night.

permalink
report
reply
24 points
*

Dude. For real. The number of jump scares I’ve had on a dark fuckin back road, and some bastard in all black seemingly materializes in front of me… Same thing with people who drove at dusk without lights on, MAKE YOURSELF VISIBLE

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

It is your responsibility as the operator of a car to see pedestrians even if they are wearing black

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Sure is, but sometimes our brains don’t work perfectly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Then we should make safer roads for everyone with better designs and lower speeds

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

No, it’s not. I’m the most responsible driver there is and even I draw the line here. When driving next to park cars I pay extra attention because someone may want to cross the road and walk out from behind a car even in places where it’s illegal but if someone hides behinds a bush and jumps out right in front of my car it’s not my fault. At night it’s my responsibility to drive below the speed limit and pay attention to the road but if some black ninja hides on the curb there’s not much I can do about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Uh, no, pretty sure it is legally your responsibility to be safe to everyone around you when driving. If you can’t do that, don’t drive a car.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Said the non car driver.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh, nice! Victim blaming!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

yeah I just murder people based on the color of their clothes. if they didn’t want to be murdered they wouldn’t have dressed like that

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Whew, I’m not alone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Fuck you, that is obviously not what I said. You people should really learn how to read, instead of just making shit up and then believing I actually said it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I read it just fine, that’s your implication.The pedestrian is responsible for protecting themselves against the tyranny of the SUV. I guess if that’s the world you want then vroom vroom mf

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 543K

    Comments