Author Topic: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes  (Read 8202 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I'm sure every once in a while someone gets drunk at home and goes on an impromptu errand in their car, etc.


You intended to get home by car. You intended to get drunk before you got home. Therefore, you intended to drive whilst drunk.

When you play the last mission of FS2 and you destroy any of the cruisers, do you intend to cause the Capella supernova? No, you intended to protect the convoy. The fact that the supernova won't happen if you don't destroy those cruisers has no bearing on what your intentions were. Even if you were thinking about it as you played the mission, and you made a conscious decision to go ahead and destroy the cruisers anyway, your intent is still "play the mission the way it was meant to be played", not "cause a supernova".

You want to blame them for their negligence, or willful negligence. That's fine. But "intent" is about what their objectives were, not what the reasonably foreseeable consequences are.

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I'm sure every once in a while someone gets drunk at home and goes on an impromptu errand in their car, etc.

I'm sure they shouldn't, because its dangerous, irresponsible, and ILLEGAL.  I would hope none of our members do, but I may be wrong.


Quote
You want to blame them for their negligence, or willful negligence. That's fine. But "intent" is about what their objectives were, not what the reasonably foreseeable consequences are.

Correct.  Which is why impaired driving causing death cases are not treated as first degree murder, but rather more akin to criminal negligence causing death... except with lighter sentences.

The discrepancy is that some people think driving under the influence is perfectly fine, and the justice system does not treat it all that harshly, which makes the probability of them in turn killing someone while driving impaired that much higher, except it isn't treated all that seriously either... which brings me back to my earlier point:  penalties for driving under the influence, particularly where serious injury or death occurs, are nowhere near harsh enough.  It is a subset of criminal negligence causing death, yet it is not treated nearly so harshly.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline StarSlayer

  • 211
  • Men Kaeshi Do
    • Steam
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
“Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world”

 
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I'm sure every once in a while someone gets drunk at home and goes on an impromptu errand in their car, etc.

I don't.
Regardless, if I did and caused someone harm, I would not forgive myself.

Quote
You intended to get home by car. You intended to get drunk before you got home. Therefore, you intended to drive whilst drunk.

When you play the last mission of FS2 and you destroy any of the cruisers, do you intend to cause the Capella supernova? No, you intended to protect the convoy. The fact that the supernova won't happen if you don't destroy those cruisers has no bearing on what your intentions were. Even if you were thinking about it as you played the mission, and you made a conscious decision to go ahead and destroy the cruisers anyway, your intent is still "play the mission the way it was meant to be played", not "cause a supernova".

Are you being told the first time you start FS2 that destroying the cruisers causes a supernova, like there are consistent advertisement campaigns about drunken driving and that knowing the effects of alcohol on driving is something you need to know in order to pass your licence? Is advancing FS2's storyline illegal? Is it me that causes the 'Nova to happen, or is the designers intent that it happens? Is anyone harmed by it?

This metaphor is rather inept.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 04:35:48 pm by -Joshua- »

 

Offline Rodo

  • Custom tittle
  • 212
  • stargazer
    • Steam
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I did it a few times, then one time I almost crashed with a truck.
Now I just ignore my cellphone when driving. I've learned from that soiled pants feeling.
el hombre vicio...

 

Offline Aardwolf

  • 211
  • Posts: 16,384
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I'm kind of surprised at the "not here, not me" reactions to a "sometimes X happens" proposition. Anyway, since I guess it was unclear, that small text was a specific response to "You intended to get home by car".

Are you being told the first time you start FS2 that destroying the cruisers causes a supernova, like there are consistent advertisement campaigns about drunken driving and that knowing the effects of alcohol on driving is something you need to know in order to pass your licence? Is advancing FS2's storyline illegal? Is it me that causes the 'Nova to happen, or is the designers intent that it happens? Is anyone harmed by it?

This metaphor is rather inept.

You're assuming what I said is a metaphor for drunk driving. It isn't. In fact it's not a metaphor at all. Anyway the crux of that post is the part you omitted in your reply. To whit: intent does not work that way.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I never text while driving, though sometimes I talk on a non hands-free phone if I'm on a reasonably empty road and going straight at a set speed, or stuck in a traffic jam without perspectives for leaving it anytime soon. I try to keep that snappy, too, and it's never idle chit-chat, but really important stuff (often directly related to where exactly I'm supposed to drive to). And never when there's someone else on board (in that case, the phone always goes to him/her).

Also, I hate people who drive under influence. It's a general rule around my house - it's either wine or the car. Given that I don't drink, so I'm usually the one that gets the latter. :) Indeed, sometimes I drive precisely so I can't drink, because in Poland, it's literally the only acceptable excuse not to drink. And even then, not everyone is willing to take it, and would rather get sloshed with friends (since generally, people in Poland can't fathom that it's possible to have fun sober...) than, you know, act like a responsible adult. I've once seen a huge truck (might've been an 18-wheeler, but I've only seen it's rear) weaving around, on a highway, going around 80mph! Good thing my father was driving at the time, he managed to stay clear of it. Needless to say, drunk driving is the real leading cause of accidents, not speeding.

 
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I'm kind of surprised at the "not here, not me" reactions to a "sometimes X happens" proposition. Anyway, since I guess it was unclear, that small text was a specific response to "You intended to get home by car".

X simply should not happen. I don't care whether or not it happens, it shouldn't.

Quote
To whit: intent does not work that way.

So how does it work then?

 

Offline swashmebuckle

  • 210
  • Das Lied von der Turd
    • The Perfect Band
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
Shower your designated drivers with gifts and praise!

(not gifts of alcohol, that's just being a dick)

 

Offline Bobboau

  • Just a MODern kinda guy
    Just MODerately cool
    And MODest too
  • 213
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I want to take a picture of this guy taking pictures of people texting while driving while driving while driving.
Bobboau, bringing you products that work... in theory
learn to use PCS
creator of the ProXimus Procedural Texture and Effect Generator
My latest build of PCS2, get it while it's hot!
PCS 2.0.3


DEUTERONOMY 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, [as] of woollen and linen together

 
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I want to take a picture of this guy taking pictures of people texting while driving while driving while driving.

Yo dawg, I heard you like documenting hazardous driving practices...

 

Offline TwentyPercentCooler

  • Operates at 375 kelvin
  • 28
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
If you want safe driving, you have to eliminate the drivers. No more human control over the vehicle. No matter how much stuff you do to make someone pay attention to the road, there's always going to be people capable of ignoring it all.

You're absolutely right, but the current laws in most places are about risk mitigation, not elimination. People make mistakes, but there's no excuse for willfully ignorant and potentially destructive behavior like texting while driving or DUI/DWI. Not to mention that since computers are programmed, operated, and serviced by humans, self-driving cars will still be theoretically able to crash and cause harm. There's also the massive legal can of worms that it opens. If you're in a self-driving car, and it crashes, who is responsible? The car manufacturer? The guys who programmed the software? The people who service it? The "operator" that is riding in it but has just as little to do with it as any of the former parties? I am sure these things will get hashed out, but the disgusting, slimy, amoral ambulance-chasers will have a feeding frenzy over it. Can't figure out who to sue? Sue everyone!

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
That's a pretty hyperbolic statement, if you ask me.

Driver error is driver error, no matter whether the driver is made of meat or algorithms. If a driving algorithm makes a mistake, then the manufacturers will be responsible.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline watsisname

Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I want to take a picture of this guy taking pictures of people texting while driving while driving while driving.

You should text him the picture.

huehuehue
In my world of sleepers, everything will be erased.
I'll be your religion, your only endless ideal.
Slowly we crawl in the dark.
Swallowed by the seductive night.

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
I agree with The_E: let's have googlecars as fast as possible. I wanna text all the time while an internet terrorist virus causes all cars to smash between themselves. Hail to the Singularity!

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Twit spotting - dangerous unaware road assholes
This is why everyone should be forced to drive manual transmission.

I am also of the opinion that, to obtain a DL in North America, you should at least be able to demonstrate the ability to start, shift, and stop in a car with a manual transmission.  The massive shift to automatics has correlated strongly with increased driver distraction and stupidity.  It's actually funny - one of the best ways of ensuring your car won't be stolen in the US and Canada is to buy one with a manual transmission.  (And it goes without saying that I will have a manual as long as I can still buy one).
I agree. And manuals are so much more fun. I don't think manuals are going to go away any time soon since i believe that would make car sales lower.

The next part that's great about manuals is that it's a real pain in the ass to receive and talk on your cell phone while you're driving. Answer the call, put the phone down, shift, pick the phone up again and say something, put the phone down, shift, etc. Some people i guess don't mind hurt their necks holding the cell phone that way (ouch). Some people are highly experienced with switching hands of the cell phone constantly between the shifter hand and the steering hand. I said screw that, what a pain in my ass, talking on the phone is supposed to be easy.

I'm too cheap for phone hands free devices, i'd rather get to my destination safely completely ignoring texts and calls (my car is a manual). The other thing that worries me is a lot of new cars and the commercials for them telling you how much you can do while you're driving. So now cars come with distractive crap if you have the extra money for it. Which leads to the hyping of touchscreens in cars for the dash controls like gps, sound system, etc. I like the normal radio dashes with buttons. You generally don't have to take your eyes off the road to turn down or up the volume, let alone hitting a preset, or seek button. You do take your eyes off the road if dash controls are completely buttonless. As far as gps goes, there's three awesome locations for non-built in ones.

Right along side the rear view mirror is awesome (makes you use your rear view mirror a lot more), or the same level as the rear view mirror on the top left corner of the windshield. The last good location was on the bottom left corner of the windshield. It's the best locations for gps guidance i could find that don't pan your eyes away from the windshield to other areas of the car, thus making a great attempt at the gps itself becoming as least intrusive and distracting as possible.
I agree with The_E: let's have googlecars as fast as possible. I wanna text all the time while an internet terrorist virus causes all cars to smash between themselves. Hail to the Singularity!
Google cars better be good. Programming errors can kill and injure. Reminds me of the uncontrollable acceleration problem found in a lot of toyotas of the last half of the last decade. I don't understand why toyota couldn't just make a software update for the computer in the car unless it was impossible, which i doubt the impossible part. All toyota did was take years of covering up their problem blaming it on driver error. Yes people with lots of money prefer to focus on sales over user fatality. Google had better make a perfect car in this case.

A fun thing to explore is if google did produce a car that drives itself. And that there was a software error at least causing accidents. How would google blame that on the occupant of the vehicle?

Most people would say that this is the perfect situation, that google wouldn't have anything to say but "my bad, here's reparations". That's much too short sighted in my own opinion. This is why i think the scenario would be fun to ponder :)
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.