ROAD RULEZ, or, DRIVER'S ED.2
 

This is my fucking thread. Mine. I fucking started it, and I'll be goddamned if I don't continue it and finish this motherfucker.

That being said, you're all free to contribute. It's not like it's my fucking thread or anything.

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT THE RULES OF THE ROAD AS THEY SHOULD BE, OR AS THEY SHOULD BE ACCEPTED.

I would like the format to be an arrogant statement expressing truth (if that is your style), followed by a more reasonable explanation of said statement. I will give an example later.

This does not mean any stupid emotionally driven-thought that pops into that probably worthless brain of yours should be tossed around. Any posts for new ROAD RULEZ should be well thought out, logically, and rationally. These should ultimately based on "higher reason", such as concern for all public safety, efficiency, and punishing those who are more concerned with selfishness than the greater good.

However, you may include ideas that might be, shall we say, "ahead of their time". Examples would be annual driving tests (strictly enforced) after age 60, a focus on police profiling Asian women drivers as part of public safety, etc.

Let's try to be a BIT grown up gents, I really would appreciate "No dirty faggots should be able to get licenses." I'm sure I don't have to name names.

Last thing: Challenge each other and have fun.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Blonde Submission #1: ARROGANT STATEMENT

If you are tailgating me less than 15 feet, and it seems aggressive or obnoxious, I'm going to start gradually slowing down, even to a stop, until you increase the distance between our vehicles or angrily pass me. I'm okay with either.


Explanation: There are three possible explanations for this behavior I have thought of, those being: ignorance, lack of awareness, and simply being a fucking asshole.

---

1 - In most states, 20 feet is the bare minimum that a vehicle should stay behind another. Not simply because the car in front feels "tailgated" (which it is, of course, being), but also if that person has to slam on their brakes, you will very likely hit the back of their car, when otherwise you would have stopped.

2 - Awareness is a huge problem in driving in general, and one I will be returning to often. Most people are so caught up in the problems of their day inside that little meat-skull of theirs, they truly aren't paying attention. That's if they aren't already distracted with other devices while driving -- doing their makeup, texting, playing with ipod, fucking with phone, hitting their children, etc. The last thing that is on their minds is how close they are to the driver in front of them, because fuck them, right?

3 - Being an asshole is incurable except through extreme conditions. I am non-violent, but also don't care much about being beat up these days, particularly because of the very likely promise of witnesses and subsequent financial recompense through legal means. I have absolutely no problem stopping traffic over tailgating. That being said, luckily most of them just pass you, scream obscenities, flip you off and move on with their day.



Okay, man that felt good. Any objections or additions to this submission?

No objections.. we need to become post/transhuman asap so these problems never arise, if we were all super-intelligent mind-melders..
Driverless cars.
How should they be programmed to avoid danger (until we are smart enough to avoid :blonde: all danger)?

When Should Your Driverless Car From Google Be Allowed To Kill You? - Forbes

Should your robot driver kill you to save a child?s life?

Wiki links for the problem
Tunnel problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Trolley problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can't make an arrogant statement, I don't have an answer right now.
What would the negative utilitarian do?

Trolley problem seems simple. In situations like that, I see no reason why we can't take the number to the extreme. When it's 5:1, it's a little tough on the "should I intervene" on the surface, but what if it were 1,000:1? A million to one? What if the entire human race (except the one dude) is eradicated if you don't switch, or just one guy dies if you do switch?

It's an easy choice when you take it to the extreme. Because of that, even though the decision is more difficult when the ratio is closer, it seems pretty obvious that a person should always switch as long as we have absolutely no information about the situation other than "pull the lever and 1 guy dies, don't and 5 die."

Agreed that we can take the number to the extreme, I don't think it changes the decision at all.
Can you imagine a scenario where the world would have been better off if x died and one lived? say the x people turned out to be akin to mussels, and the one person was godlike.
If so then you might decide that your action was a bad idea, why make a decision? Numbers alone say nothing about value imo.
^it's late this could well be garbage,I don't know if I agree with it. Consequentialism is interesting.

I think the point of the scenario is that we know nothing about the people tied to the trolley tracks. It's not about "maybe one is more important than another," but rather "would I rather be directly responsible for killing one person or stand by while X people are killed."

I contend that, since the only question is "stand by" or "pull the lever," you have total control of the situation with zero variables. It's an easy choice. Make sure the least amount of people (of which we know nothing in particular) die.

Guys, this is about Road Rulez, not played-out moral dilemma's. Post some of your goddamn road rulez.


Do you even drive, Dent?

Drive? like a grown ups car?

Yes! lol

Got you, in the real world there are variables though, especially when programming a car for these scenarios.
If the queen were driving into a little girl vs a thug driving into a little girl for example.
If you know nothing of the people sometimes you're going to make a bad decision picking the majority.
I think the trolley problem only works if you are told they are identical clones, knowing who the people are is everything.

If a dumbass kid falls in front of my auto car, it better kill the kid and not smash me into the wall.

It's really no different now. Most people aren't going to commit suicide to save a kid too stupid to know not to play in the street. I know I wouldn't.

As far as the trolley problem goes, the five people on the tracks were going to die even if I wasn't at the tracks that day. If I flip the switch, then I am directly responsible for the death of one man. If I don't flip the switch, I do not believe I am at all responsible for the other deaths.

I'm not sure the last bit there is true. Swerving when something is in your way on the road is a natural instinct. When it's something like a child, I'd imagine it's an even larger instinct. You may not consciously decide to not hit the kid, but it doesn't mean the result won't be the same.

It's a situation in which the circumstances leading up to the moment are fully not in your control, but the circumstances in the moment fully are. To me, that means that you're not responsible directly for any deaths regardless of pulling or not pulling the lever. It is no different than a person saying "would you rather one person die or five people die?" If you answered "one" there, would you still consider that you're directly responsible for that person's death?

The fact that zero intervention leads to five deaths doesn't matter since you know every variable and have full control. You're really just answering the above question. Not pulling the lever is you answering that you'd prefer five people to die. Pulling is answering you'd prefer one to die.

I think that's oversimplifying the question.

Is t the question really more like, "would you sacrifice one person to save five?"

I'm not sure how that is any different than the question I posed. If all variables are the same (we know zero about the people and, thus, have to assume each are exactly equal "value"), you would/should absolutely sacrifice one to save five.

Your "don't want to intervene" feeling is rooted in the belief that, as long as you don't impact the situation, you don't have any "blame" for the result. That doesn't really make sense, though.

Imagine if there aren't 5 people on the other rail and the situation is either:

1.) Don't pull the lever and one person dies.

2.) Pull the lever and no one dies.

Would you still feel okay not pulling the lever in this situation?

I want more RODE RULEZ

Learning what the sign with the koala on it means, does not a competent motorist make
 

I gots some rood rulez for ya:

(1) Thou shalt not merge onto a highway at 40% cruising speed.

Dummy.

(2) Thou shant block a merger by moseying along next to someone in need of a lane.

Jerk.

Snot hard to keep track of more than one car at a time, you have no qualms with it every weekend when Ray-Jay's boyz run dem trains through you.

Oh and another thing, I don't know about 'Murica, but here in 'Straya?

Youngin's be needing more drive schoolin'. (Some eldens too mind you!)

You know, essential skills like: reading traffic, physics of traction & stopping distances, what 200+ killerjoules looks like when it's expended in milliseconds, and how to update bookface whilst changin' choons and changin' gears correctly.

Nah but yeah matching your speed to the stream you're entering, in order to minimise disturbances should be standard knowledge. As is facilitating your fellow motorists in their efforts to do the same safely.

And I dislike that our culture glamorises risk taking behaviour, hawt cars, short skirts and big skids (in yo undies) but not the safety skills and repercussions side of being a motorist.

p.s. Hi

1rst

Putting my bones behind ID being wrong on this one

I can personally confirm that claupen is a legitimate new member. Please extend as much courtesy as you can tolerate.

Thank you. You will be rewarded.

MODERATORS: One posrep that I gave Claupen took him from "10" to "OVER 4000".

Might I politely suggest an alteration, removal, or otherwise recommended action to the Rep system? Can't we just do +1's? Keep it all positive? And Maybe a neutral where we can talk shit or explain. Just highdeas.

Amount of rep is calculated by a complex algorithm that takes into consideration account's age, number of posts, and even your own rep. That your posreps are worth 4k is legitimate.

A message you would prefer to deliver in a "neutral" rep would be better used as a reply to the thread.

We must kill blonde. He's gotten too powerful.

For example, my rep gives <715

My feeble mortal brain, does not compute this. In a nutshell, I've spent 10+ years gaining my rep. I don't really give a shit about it. But some dude shows up and gets like a bajillion points. I don't really care, but something about me does, and I'd like to explore it further.

What do you mean "is legitimate". It's fake internet points, ultimately. But I'll play. Please define your terms of "legiftimacy", as you see them. It might be my problem because I view all newcomers as equals (UNLIKE SOME POSSIBLE TYRANTS), and think the concept of "tenure" and rep based off of it as rather, well, unfair. If it's going to b that skewed, why even have the system at all? Nostalgia?

Could we (you) possibly reformat the system, or come up with something else? Not tryin' 2 King Robert u here bro but damn, you guys and your complex algorithms. Can't we just institute a simple, start-from-scratch talley system? Maybe a "quality of post" 1-5 variable option or just basing merit on post count and longevity?

Ultimately,

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpnvdq1Co11qafrh6.png

, jsin, that noob has 4000 rep posts for a pretty average first post (no offense bud).


audio response

If anyone is curious, the member with the most internets is this one. We should take this day to celebrate me.

The 4000 netz also makes sense as it gives a new quality member to challenge a veterans place if ambitious enough.

None taken, I feel like a guy who's never picked up a deck of cards winning at a table of seasoned poker players.
-More average to come.

Nah. Algorithm is already set. Sorry man.