I believe that this is one of the worst ideas about modern cars I have ever heard.
It's almost equivalent to saying that we should replace all metal knives in kitchens with plastic knives.
"There is no reason why a person should be able to use a metal knife to hurt someone else."
Some of the problems with your idea :
1) A lot of places don't have speed signs - then should we allow people to drive 130 in 80 zone?
2) Outdated / incorrect signs - not every place on the planet has properly maintained roads.
3) AI mistake - if an AI mistake leads a car to read 50 kmph as 30 kmph, what then? Should the driver suffer?
4) Emergencies - have you ever been in one? Imagine if your car led to someone's death because you didn't trust people with their own car
5) Empty roads - if you have an empty road in front of you, you can go 110-120 in 80 zone. This practice is followed at every single place on the planet.
etc. etc.
You know the worst part about your idea? It's so insane that it actually will be implemented in the next 5-10 years. That's the part I hate the most. Bad ideas are not a problem, but actually implementing them is.
All it takes is 1 exec in Tesla who thinks like you or who has had a loved one die by overspeeding.
Any opposition to your idea can be crushed by saying "do you want people to die by overspeeding"?
We won't ban alcohol, but we want to ban overspeeding. The irony!
1) in my country the default is 80 km/h when no sign. Use that, then. Like seriously, do you think people today think "wow, no sign, I can drive 200"??
2) a sign isn't outdated, it's by definition the limit
3) so what? No one gets hurt by someone driving a bit slower for a short stretch.
4) if you care so much about emergencies, shouldn't you be for this policy? Tens of thousands die each year in traffic accidents, isn't that worth solving vs some obscure edge case that might perhaps sometime cost someone their life??
5) no, follow the speed limit. You're the kind of driver that makes this kind of law necessary. It doesn't matter that the road ahead is empty, if you misjudge the next turn and kill someone. What a crazy, selfish and entitled attitude you have.
> All it takes is 1 exec in Tesla who thinks like you or who has had a loved one die by overspeeding.
Your lack if empathy is astonishing. This happens all the time, and is why it should be implemented.
You can buy metal kitchen knives in most parts of the world but you may not be allowed to walk around town pointing them at people, and you may not be able to buy a claymore even if it is just for cutting cheese or opening letters. And speed limits can be >60mph even when 30-40 may be dangerous. So I don’t really understand what your analogy is, because in the real world there are reasonable restrictions on things, and where the proposed restriction still allows things that are unsafe.
You missed the point of my analogy. You CAN point your knife at anyone and even attack with it. You will be punished for it. That's the point.
The knife is not going to stop you from pointing it at someone. If we want car to force people to not overspeed, perhaps we should replace metal knives to plastic ones to prevent people attacking other people with it.
My entire point is that the responsibility to drive safely should be on the driver. The car should not force anything.
Also, you should read the rest of my answer to see why I think it's a really bad idea.
In 2020, the US had 1,700 deaths caused by knives and other cutting instruments[1] and 38,000 deaths from cars[2]. Cars clearly need more safety regulation than knives.
It's almost equivalent to saying that we should replace all metal knives in kitchens with plastic knives. "There is no reason why a person should be able to use a metal knife to hurt someone else."
Some of the problems with your idea : 1) A lot of places don't have speed signs - then should we allow people to drive 130 in 80 zone? 2) Outdated / incorrect signs - not every place on the planet has properly maintained roads. 3) AI mistake - if an AI mistake leads a car to read 50 kmph as 30 kmph, what then? Should the driver suffer? 4) Emergencies - have you ever been in one? Imagine if your car led to someone's death because you didn't trust people with their own car 5) Empty roads - if you have an empty road in front of you, you can go 110-120 in 80 zone. This practice is followed at every single place on the planet. etc. etc.
You know the worst part about your idea? It's so insane that it actually will be implemented in the next 5-10 years. That's the part I hate the most. Bad ideas are not a problem, but actually implementing them is.
All it takes is 1 exec in Tesla who thinks like you or who has had a loved one die by overspeeding.
Any opposition to your idea can be crushed by saying "do you want people to die by overspeeding"?
We won't ban alcohol, but we want to ban overspeeding. The irony!