William Chops Westfield wrote:

>  Just what we need.  "Skilled drivers" driving 100MPH through a maze of
> cars restricted to 50MPH...  Come to think of it, that's about what we
> have now, although it's regulated by peoples opinion of themselves
> rather than the law.  Causes a lot of accidents...

I agree. What we have now is self regulated speeding, and many of the speeders are very unqualified.
I have driven at least a half million miles (no exaggeration), most of them in high speed traffic. I
am much more qualified than most to do this, but that doesn't matter, because there are no levels of
qualification. As I said earlier, there will be no change until we recognize that we're looking at
the wrong problem. Most ignore the law because it is too restrictive, and the law can't be loosened
because it must fit all. When the law is tailored to fit, then it will be obeyed, or at least it can
be enforced. We are negotiating many millions of hours of lost productivity, so the current law will
not be enforced reasonably. It will occasionally be enforced unreasonably for political reasons (or
to enhance revenue), but in a way that will not condition drivers to slow down.

Of course we will never really agree, will we? I'd like to see robot cars on smart highways and no
drivers. And I'd like them all to be controlled by distributed networks of PICs. And I'd like us all
to do very well by the project. But Monday I will probably be very tempted to exceed the speed limit
on my way to work, if the slowpoke in front of me will just get out of my way! And no I have not had
a lot of accidents and the ones I've had were in snow and at low speeds.

And I am certainly NOT in favor of using artificial means to circumvent the law, only in changing
it.
Have a great weekend,
Dan

--

Daniel Hart
Embedded System Design Engineer
NBS Technologies, Inc. (Card Technology Corp.)
70 Eisenhower Drive, Paramus, NJ 07652, USA
+1 201 845 7373 x183    dhart@nbstech.com