MIT Teaches Autonomous Cars How To Deal With Selfish Drivers 117
Researchers at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) have devised a system that can predict what different cars will do by determining how selfish or selfless a driver is. From a report: Specifically, they used something called social value orientation (SVO), which represents the degree to which someone is selfish ("egoistic") versus altruistic or cooperative ("prosocial"). The system then estimates drivers' SVOs to create real-time driving trajectories for self-driving cars. Testing their algorithm on the tasks of merging lanes and making unprotected left turns, the team showed that they could better predict the behavior of other cars by a factor of 25 percent. For example, in the left-turn simulations their car knew to wait when the approaching car had a more egoistic driver, and to then make the turn when the other car was more prosocial.
To try to expand the car's social awareness, the CSAIL team combined methods from social psychology with game theory, a theoretical framework for conceiving social situations among competing players. The team modeled road scenarios where each driver tried to maximize their own utility and analyzed their "best responses" given the decisions of all other agents. Based on that small snippet of motion from other cars, the team's algorithm could then predict the surrounding cars' behavior as cooperative, altruistic, or egoistic -- grouping the first two as "prosocial." People's scores for these qualities rest on a continuum with respect to how much a person demonstrates care for themselves versus care for others. Here are some potential use cases of such a system: "Say you're a human driving along and a car suddenly enters your blind spot -- the system could give you a warning in the rear-view mirror that the car has an aggressive driver, allowing you to adjust accordingly. It could also allow self-driving cars to actually learn to exhibit more human-like behavior that will be easier for human drivers to understand."
The team is planning to apply their system to pedestrians, bicycles, and other agents in driving environments. "In addition, they will be investigating other robotic systems acting among humans, such as household robots, and integrating SVO into their prediction and decision-making algorithms," the report says.
To try to expand the car's social awareness, the CSAIL team combined methods from social psychology with game theory, a theoretical framework for conceiving social situations among competing players. The team modeled road scenarios where each driver tried to maximize their own utility and analyzed their "best responses" given the decisions of all other agents. Based on that small snippet of motion from other cars, the team's algorithm could then predict the surrounding cars' behavior as cooperative, altruistic, or egoistic -- grouping the first two as "prosocial." People's scores for these qualities rest on a continuum with respect to how much a person demonstrates care for themselves versus care for others. Here are some potential use cases of such a system: "Say you're a human driving along and a car suddenly enters your blind spot -- the system could give you a warning in the rear-view mirror that the car has an aggressive driver, allowing you to adjust accordingly. It could also allow self-driving cars to actually learn to exhibit more human-like behavior that will be easier for human drivers to understand."
The team is planning to apply their system to pedestrians, bicycles, and other agents in driving environments. "In addition, they will be investigating other robotic systems acting among humans, such as household robots, and integrating SVO into their prediction and decision-making algorithms," the report says.
How to deal with selfish drivers, AI version (Score:2)
Cut in front of
Slow down to just below speed limit
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Easy. Leave earlier for your appointment, stop driving like a maniac.
Leave earlier?
Most asshole drivers don't even realize the difference between driving safely and driving like an asshole/maniac, amounts to a whopping five minutes off your commute.
Sad to think how many have been harmed or killed by selfish drivers trying to "save time".
Re: (Score:2)
The difference between driving like my father and how I drive is over 3 hours a week difference in time spent commuting (and a couple of gallons of diesel).
I could also drive selfishly to save another five minutes, but saving time is both viable and has a material benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
reinventing the wheel actually https://www.mobileye.com/uk/fleets/products/ [mobileye.com] This has been out for at least a year already.
Re: (Score:2)
No need to slam the brakes. Just turning on the rear foglights will usually scare the crap out of them. And it keeps you safe from their dangerous behaviour.
Re: (Score:2)
No need to slam the brakes. Just turning on the rear foglights will usually scare the crap out of them. And it keeps you safe from their dangerous behaviour.
That's also illegal, if they're not needed. On my way over the bridge between Marysville and Yuba City I had a pickup truck cut me off and then turn on his apparently dash-wired aftermarket rear floodlights... I called the cops. Fuck that fucking fuck.
You know what keeps you safe from the behavior of tailgating? Getting out of the way. If someone wants to go faster than you, let them by. That keeps everyone calmer, instead of escalating the situation by attempting to blind drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
And the way to let them by is to slow down. Way down. The closer they get, the slower I go. The clue that you are too close is the middle finger I'm giving you. Turning on your lights or brake checking the tailgater is only illegal if the lights are bright enough to be a nuisance, and there are actual tests for that. But, you know what else is "illegal". Tailgating.
Re: (Score:2)
Turning on your lights or brake checking the tailgater is only illegal if the lights are bright enough to be a nuisance, and there are actual tests for that.
Uh, no. It's illegal to operate fog lights when you're not in the fog, and it's illegal to operate reverse lights when you're not in reverse. And it's always illegal to brake check people, because you're trying to cause an accident.
But, you know what else is "illegal". Tailgating.
So you think the best response is something else illegal? Hypocrite.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't brake to turn on the rear brake lights.
I brake to open up space in front of me. If I'm being tailgated I want double the normal amount of space in front of me to allow for both my car and the tailgater to stop safely.
If flashing brake lights makes them back off that is a good side effect.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't brake to turn on the rear brake lights.
The brake lights are not the topic of conversation, we're taking about rear fog light[s]. (Most vehicles have only one.) If you're not going to bother to follow the conversation, why would you want to comment?
I brake to open up space in front of me. If I'm being tailgated I want double the normal amount of space in front of me to allow for both my car and the tailgater to stop safely.
Fine then, do that. Or, you know, leave them room to pass, or pull off and let them pass, instead of holding them up and making them go the speed you want to go.
If flashing brake lights makes them back off that is a good side effect.
You're the only one talking about brake lights.
Re: (Score:1)
You know what keeps you safe from the behavior of tailgating? Getting out of the way.
Maybe it's a regional thing, but here in Florida there are assholes who will tailgate even in the furthest right travel lane (and people who use the "exit only" rightmost lane, when available, for passing).
Sometimes, the only way to send them the message they're in the wrong fucking lane is to tap your brakes just enough to illuminate the lights.
Re: (Score:2)
You're replying to someone willing to cause an accident because they don't like someone else driving dangerously.
Instead of, I don't know, focussing on their own driving and avoiding harm for other road users.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Sorry officer, I thought I saw a deer [cat, rabbit, squirrel, baby, raccoon] about to run across the road, so I hit my brakes."
You might get away with that once. If it takes you multiple tries to cause an accident, and they get them all on dashcam, you're going to get nailed. You could just get out of the way, you know, like an unselfish person would.
Re: (Score:2)
You might get away with that once. If it takes you multiple tries to cause an accident, and they get them all on dashcam, you're going to get nailed.
Oh, yeah, 100%. It actually makes me glad that dash cams are becoming more ubiquitous. There are too many shithead drivers out there.
You could just get out of the way, you know, like an unselfish person would.
This one depends. I don't camp in the fast lane. If I'm in that lane, it's because I'm going the speed of the traffic in front of me or I'm passing someone. In those cases, if you're on my bumper, you're the asshole. The only other case, is if it's bumper-to-bumper and nobody is going anywhere fast. In that case, let's tighten this shit up; stand in solidarity against th
Re: (Score:1)
In that case, let's tighten this shit up; stand in solidarity against the line jumpers, curb drivers, and lane changers.
Of course, people doing just as you suggest are a big part of the reason you're stuck in traffic to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
Which parts of those things slow down traffic? The people cutting others off? The people driving down the shoulder? The people that don't understand how a zipper merge works? The people that change lanes ever 30 feet because the other lane is moving 1/16th of a mph faster?
If you live anywhere near a city, slow traffic is going to happen. Driving like an aggressive asshole that thinks their time is more important than everyone else's will never sit well with me. I'm not going to run someone into the gua
Re: (Score:2)
If I'm in the slow lane, traffic is moving, and you're unnecessarily on my ass, that's on you. I'm not going to brake check someone, I don't want to deal with the hassle of an insurance claim. (Which, if there's no video, I can almost guarantee it's going to be 100% the fault the guy in back.) But, you can bet your ass I'll take the cruise off and see how slow we can go before you decide to go around me.
I don't know where you guys are, but in North Carolina if you hit someone in the rear, it's your fault. Period.
My wife was stopped in a left hand turning lane behind another vehicle. She was hit from behind by someone not paying attention, which slammed her into the vehicle in front of her. She was deemed at fault for being to close to the car in front. You can say that was the officer being an idiot, but our insurance paid for the guy in front of her, and they don't give up money that easily.
I repeat,
Re: (Score:2)
That's really surprising that your insurance would cough up anything. Around here (MN) you're assigned percentage of the blame for the accident, negotiated by and agreed upon by the involved insurance providers. Talking with my insurance dude after an accident (someone ran a red light, I t-boned them) he said it's pretty rare here where someone isn't assigned some percentage of the blame. Unless your car gets hit when it's parked, you and/or your insurance are going to pay SOME portion of it. In my case
Re: (Score:2)
So, they are going to send their dash-cam video of the them tailgating you? Who is getting charged with reckless driving, again?
Re: (Score:2)
Chiptuning 2.0
Re: (Score:3)
That already exists too. NVidia's autonomous driving solution has an ethical dial that you can set to zero.
SVO = Social Credit System (Score:2)
When they say they're "investigating" other uses for this, let's not be fooled as to what this will turn into.
The easiest (read: cheapest) way systems will determine your SVO score is to feed it everything from your social media.
Which is exactly why I see SVO being akin to a certain Communist Social Credit System.
And we're measuring selfishness here? Social media turning Attention Whore into a career goal has created an entire planet full of selfish humans who already know who the most important person o
Re: SVO = Social Credit System (Score:2)
Yup. Same kind of Nazi assholes planning for the same fully automated totalitarianism.
Re: (Score:2)
And how will the car determine that the self-absorbed, Facebook narcissist is driving the oncoming car?
TL;DR version (Score:1)
So... have they made an automatic "stupid-driver-near" that sets up the claxon and a megaphone with the recording of "you stupid idiot, drive properly or I'll call the police!", replacing "stupid" with a more agressive adjective based on the stupidity of the driver.
In the UK (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The BMW stereotypes have some fair basis on reality in my experience, but they are a little lazy. People who "like" driving tend towards cars aimed at that segment like BMWs, sportier Audis, GTi/SR/ST etc spec cars from other manufacturers, and these are ofte
Re: (Score:1)
Same in Australia. The BMW logo is also a warning that you need to watch for un-signalled lane changes or turning. Or an explanation as to why they are driving along with their indicator on and not changing lanes...
Arf! In Canada we have it down to a science. During rush hour when you get off work and are hungry and in a hurry to get home just don't use signals it will give away your intentions. It is completely true that during that time of day if you turn on your signal the person behind you will not slow down but speed up if you are changing lanes. If you are turning in front of them and they are oncoming then the same thing applies. So just don't signal and they usually won't speed up to cut off your move. Can you
Re: (Score:2)
During rush hour when you get off work and are hungry and in a hurry to get home just don't use signals it will give away your intentions. It is completely true that during that time of day if you turn on your signal the person behind you will not slow down but speed up if you are changing lanes. If you are turning in front of them and they are oncoming then the same thing applies. So just don't signal and they usually won't speed up to cut off your move. Can you imagine if turn signals were mandated on all race tracks, hell no one would ever get anywhere!
It's been a few years since I've driven in France so it may have changed, but they used to use the opposite tactic to hide their intentions. They would drive along the Autoroute with their indicators permanently on!
Re: (Score:2)
Or on a Burnt Out Combie. On a Heavy Trail, head full of Zombie.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I would add to that, for the US: Lexus drivers. Also, Hyundai drivers, increasingly, oddly enough
Lastly, minivan driving soccer moms - they're crazy.
It's not a software problem, but hardware (Score:2)
They're approaching this *entirely* the wrong way by using software after identification. At best, this can only affect a minute or two.
It's a hardware problem, and the solutions range from rockets to pulse lasers . . .
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, just look for cars with steering wheels. Saves you time.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
A. With porcupines, the pricks are on the outside.
I let people cut-in for selfish reasons (Score:5, Interesting)
I let people cut in front of me on the highway because I prefer to not bumper ride purely out of concern for my own safety, not theirs. People who cut in front of me in traffic usually get to the highway exit maybe few seconds earlier, so there is absolutely no rational benefit for me not let them cut in (but it does risk an accident). If only the MIT guys considered that self-interest can also lead to calm driving.
Re: I let people cut-in for selfish reasons (Score:2)
I let people cut in front of me on the highway because I prefer to not bumper ride
If traffic's light enough that you can maintain a comfortable following distance, it also generally means you've got the opportunity to leisurely perform preemptive lane changes and avoid being cut off.
Re: (Score:2)
If only the MIT guys considered that self-interest can also lead to calm driving.
I bet that a sizeable portion of people working on self driving don't even have a driver's license...
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't you wonderful! How about getting out of the passing lane so others can pass? You'll only get to the exit 'a few seconds later' and you won't be one of the left lane drivers complicit in backing things up. While in the left lane, you should be attempting to pass.
Slow drivers in the passing lane are surely frustrating, but most of the bad behavior I've experienced on California freeways occurs in merging or lane changing situations. Lots of commuters seem to have a problem with the concept of yielding right-of-way to help smooth things out. "I was here first, asshole," seems to be the motto for many drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
Slow drivers in the passing lane are surely frustrating, but most of the bad behavior I've experienced on California freeways occurs in merging or lane changing situations. Lots of commuters seem to have a problem with the concept of yielding right-of-way to help smooth things out. "I was here first, asshole," seems to be the motto for many drivers.
Not California here, but I have a commute where there is heavy bumper to bumper afternoon traffic. I pass three places, clearly marked, within 2 miles where the right lane must turn. Every single day there are people who refuse to wait in traffic and think they can short circuit a bunch by racing down that right lane until the last minute and cut over. I see the same offenders day after day. Their parking passes even give away that they are clearly work commuters and know exactly what they are doing. I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In California at least, right turn lanes and bike lanes often share space with the right turn lane. So unless you want to remove any protection for cyclists, you can't use an "all vehicles are free to use all the space" approach. Where there is a right turn lane outside of the bike lane, drivers still must pass through the bike lane to get to it, and it often does not have a corresponding lane on the other side of an intersection.
No, there needs to be both an optimization of road allocation, and people have
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but that kind of thinking is part of the problem. Optimal traffic patterns are achieved by using all lanes until merging must occur (ie: when the lines between lanes become solid). Everybody piling up early in the non-turning lane only makes traffic worse.
Sorry, but no. We are not discussing traffic merging from another road. This is someone intentionally moving over into a turn lane and trying to go around those already waiting for the next light. This is no different than using off/on ramp sidings on the highway to pass slower vehicles. It is only about a small time gain for the driver in the wrong at the expense of all of those who waited patiently. And I'm happy to send them off on the scenic route.
It's time to outgrow kindergarten and learn how to drive.
Learning to drive is learning how to follow rules.
Re: I let people cut-in for selfish reasons (Score:2)
Who told you I don't do that? If there is room ahead I always get over to let people who want to go faster go. If the traffic is backed up and I am already going slower than I would if I could, then I don't get over. When driving with light to no traffic, I rarely have anyone come up to pass, but when they approach faster than me, I always get out of their way and often follow them a quarter to half mile behind using them as my rabbit (to flush out any speed traps).
Re: (Score:3)
Hey get a life and take a big rig defensive driving course. Don't be a fucking moron, the jackass attitude that courtesy causes traffic backups causes more backup problems on today's roads. What a dickhead attitude you have, I am sure like others with your mindset, that you are pissed at today's ridiculously high insurance rates. The OP said nothing about driving in the left lane, or the opposite if from the other side of the pond.
It is selfishness that causes traffic backups on my commute. Drivers blocking the flow of traffic because they are driving in the incorrect lane. People stopping unexpectedly to allow an unprotected left turn across traffic when they have a green light and right of way (yes this is selfish actions for both the stopper and the turner), people blocking one or two lanes of traffic to cut over into the exit lane in order to save 5 minutes on their commute home, etc. All of that is selfish. Being too courteo
Trolley Problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can't get into legal trouble by not doing anything, so that's how they'll solve it.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't care how they drive around selfish people, I just want to know how they respond to the Trolley Problem.
They will solve it by following the law, which is to say that they won't dodge to another lane unless it's clear. Instead they will hit the brakes — probably sooner than a human driver would — and minimize impact force.
This is obvious and has also been discussed to death. Where were you?
It's called rules of the road (Score:3)
This is the way to go (Score:3)
Re: This is the way to go (Score:2)
Finally they seem to be getting it.
Aren't appearances grand??
Re: This is the way to go (Score:2)
No one would have blind spots if they simply adjusted their mirrors correctly. Point your side mirror outward almost as far as they go. It takes a while to get used to, but once you do and drive again with the normal style you immediately feel less safe and aware.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do we need autonomous cars? (Score:4, Interesting)
No one has ever answered this question but I suspect the true answer is So Companies Can Make Money and Governments Have More Control.
Because any other answer is just BS. Don't want to or can't drive yourself? Call a taxi or get public transport if you have it nearby.
Re:Why do we need autonomous cars? (Score:4, Informative)
Because driving cars sucks. People driving cars is also bad for people walking or riding bikes. I have had people nearly hit me multiple times while walking or riding a bike as they just drive along without even paying attention. Some of the worst is when someone is too your left at a stop light and when the light changes they slam on the gas and try to turn right in front of you.
I have even watched someone pull out their phone while driving and drift into the bike lane while paying attention to their phone.
I trust self-driving cars FAR more than I trust people to pay attention.
Re: Why do we need autonomous cars? (Score:2)
"I trust autonomous death-bots FAR more than I trust people to EXTERMINATE!!"
FTFY
Re: Why do we need autonomous cars? (Score:2)
I trust self-driving cars FAR more than I trust people to pay attention.
Then it's a good thing the former isn't at all depend on the latter (thank god for the arcane magic sealed within those mysterious black boxes, eh?).
Driving cars doesn't suck (Score:2)
I quite enjoy driving. If you don't then as I said above, get a taxi. You don't need some half arsed computer driving the thing.
"I trust self-driving cars FAR more than I trust people to pay attention."
Well good luck going around L'Arc de Triumph in Paris in your self driving car. It'll be lucky if it makes it 20 metres without coming to a dead stop utterly confused. Ditto any city that doesn't have a nice wide US grid style road layout.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't then as I said above, get a taxi
Stop pretending that's a reasonable option.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, have you just stepped out of the 1970s? You ever heard of Uber?
Re: (Score:2)
That/s if it's available.
Public transportation is a nightmare, especially in North America. Uber and Lyft help, somewhat, but the bill can be quite high, and depending on your lifestyle, expensive. Carshares work as well for some people, but again, your lifestyle must be compatible, and you're back to the "I have to drive" option.
And the further you go, the less and less Uber, Lyft or a taxi are because the price just climbs to the point
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why do we need autonomous cars? (Score:2)
Just apply that same logic to cars
Was this an attempt at humor?
Re: (Score:2)
What about false altruism? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a pedestrian or cyclist, I often don't even want cars to yield when they have the right of way. When I see the cars approaching, I'm already planning to go behind the car, which would be quick and painless. But instead, I have to wait to see what it's doing, to make sure it is really stopping for me, and then I still have to worry about the other traffic.
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. I don't want to walk in front of a waiting vehicle if I can avoid it. They're just one foot slip away from crushing me.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on, automatics don't just lurch forward when you get off the brake. Manuals, of course, will either roll (if they're on a slope) or do nothing if the driver releases the brake. Unless you're walking within a couple meters of the front bumper, both you and they should have more than enough reaction time to prevent a collision, even if they do start rolling forward. If they do hit you, it's not going to be very hard. I've had my car bumped from behind by people in non-moving traffic losing focus and r
Re: (Score:2)
I think you have unrealistic expectations of the learning ability of autonomous cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Works when that one is a motorcycle cop having a lot of fun stopping people from relieving traffic by entering the median strip to join the turn lane. I did that once. Spotted him in a parking lot accelerating to catch up with me, slammed on my brakes, and when he pulled out in front of me, he looked VERY confused.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to drive, so throw things at them (Score:2)
I know, it's a form of road rage which is illegal. But damn, just the thought makes me feel better.
Re: (Score:2)
Can's of soup thrown out the window at the people that are being idiots in traffic would catch their attention.
I know, it's a form of road rage which is illegal. But damn, just the thought makes me feel better.
It's not illegal because it's road rage, it's illegal because it's assault, and poses a hazard to everyone around you, and them. The solution to selfish drivers isn't to ante up on selfishness, especially not into violence.
Just look for the BMW Logo (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Most efficient way to spot a "selfish" driver
No, the cocks have moved on to Audis. BMW is now a way to spot an "old" driver.
That reminds me, I should work on my Audi :D
Easier to tell from behind (Score:2)
while us mere mortals.. (Score:2)
Could this AI reward aggressive drivers? (Score:3)
If AI predicts aggressive drivers to give way to them, then wouldn't that also reward the aggressive/risky driving behavior? It would make sense that when someone drives aggressively and gets what they want without consequences, the aggressive driver's risky behavior is normalized and occurrences would increase. Especially if they know they are just being a jerk to dumb 'ol computer rather than a human driver. Not that I think every drive should be a game of chicken with other drivers to keep them in check, but if the sort of predictive tech in the article is adopted a future partial roll-out of AI cars I wonder if it could make some perverse rewards for the human drivers sharing the roads.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter what the autonomous car makers do, humans will game them from day one. It's what we do. It is why we are superior.
I agree, up to the word "superior"... Superior depends on the qualities something is judged against, which can vary.
My prediction would be a minority of selfish drivers will game the system just as you say, but that selfish behavior will hasten others to implement laws, mandates, or incentives to reduce/remove/punish those undesired selfish, risky behaviors. To much outcry, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We are superior because we are flexible and we constantly adjust to our environment.
Of course, humans are superior by that metric, but what if the metric was something else? ... like safety? It's very easy to imagine a near future when AI driven vehicles are proven with real-world data to be empirically safer than human drivers. That's when society starts to debate whether it's worth allowing the selfish people to continue gaming the system or if the rules of the game should be changed [as has been done many times throughout history].
Easy (Score:2)
Just check if the car has Massachusetts plates.
They Are Teaching The Car To Drive Wrong (Score:1)
Testing their algorithm on the tasks of merging lanes and making unprotected left turns, the team showed that they could better predict the behavior of other cars by a factor of 25 percent. For example, in the left-turn simulations their car knew to wait when the approaching car had a more egoistic driver, and to then make the turn when the other car was more prosocial.
In other words, they are designing their cars to ignore right-of-way when it thinks that the other driver is going to "wave them on". This is the exact opposite of what they should be doing. They should teach their cars to sit and wait until the other driver realizes that they are the one fucking everything up by not taking the right-of way that they have.
Check the rear window (Score:2)
If it has Apple stickers, they're gullible enough to let me thru.
How to deal? (Score:4, Informative)
You're an AI, kid, you have a series of tubes connected to your car, so you can film the bastards and snitch on them to the police.
Manufacturers will sell "jerk mode" as an option (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Alexa: Extend middle finger (Score:2)
Why isn't there a "skill" for this yet?
Is this just pattern matching? (Score:2)
Does assigning personalities to other drivers really get you anything beyond just correlations? I can say, "That driver was tailgating me, I so think they're an aggressive driver. Now they've pulled into the next lane to pass me, and since they're aggressive, they'll probably cut me off." I'm reasoning about their personality and motivations. But you could as easily say, "When a car first tailgates you then changes lanes to pass you, there's a high probability they'll cut you off." That's the sort of c
Re: Annoying cyclists in spandex (Score:2)
Murder anyone who mildly annoys me!!!!!1!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Been there Done that [mobileye.com]