Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Google Got States To Legalize Driverless Cars
Associated Press ^ | 5/30/14 | Justin Pritchard

Posted on 05/30/2014 11:13:25 PM PDT by Lmo56

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (AP) -- About four years ago, the Google team trying to develop cars driven by computers - not people - concluded that sooner than later, the technology would be ready for the masses. There was one big problem: No state had even considered whether driverless cars should be legal.

And yet this week, Google said it wants to give Californians access to a small fleet of prototypes it will make without a steering wheel or pedals.

The plan is possible because, by this time next year, driverless cars will be legal in the tech giant's home state.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: automatedcars; car; cronycapitalism; cronycorporatism; donoevil; doublestandard; driverless; driverlesscars; experimentation; fascism; google; highways; lobbyists; noaccountability; payforplay; payola; publicroads; safetyfirst; scienceexperiment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last
This comes under one of my Dad's favorite sayings:

Just because you can ... doesn't mean you should"

I can see a dozen ways this can go sideways. To name a few:

1. What happens when the computer system hoses up on the freeway when all the traffic is moving 60 mph and there is a car riding your ass ???

2. You want to get to Golden Gate Park in SF and the GPS system makes a last minute left turn and puts you into the Pacific Ocean.

3. The computer system craps out, you have an accident [which would be your fault] - who gets sued ??? You, Google ???

1 posted on 05/30/2014 11:13:26 PM PDT by Lmo56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

2 posted on 05/30/2014 11:16:51 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2Million USD for Cruz and/or Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yup. Good old fashioned axle grease.


3 posted on 05/30/2014 11:30:57 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Insurance companies’ and auto accident attorneys will be all over Google. Can you imagine the settlements plaintiffs will get when one of the Google vehicles malfunctions and causes a 20 car pileup complete with Mack trucks and decapitations? If you want to bankrupt a company go right ahead though I have a sneaking suspicion that Google’s intent was to market this to trucking companies so they wouldn’t have to pay salaries. I bet they were already projecting profits on this endeavor.


4 posted on 05/30/2014 11:31:09 PM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

I think this is for slow speed use, but still. It will take only one visible duck-up to give Google a black eye.

I envision that if/when there is such a thing, Microsoft with its Bing will release a statement to the effect that while Microsoft software is good enough to translate spoken language in real time, they do not attempt to drive cars with it. Google must be AWFULLY confident in this. The bad publicity could hurt them worse than anything crazy they have done with their browser.


5 posted on 05/30/2014 11:34:50 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

“sooner than later” ? Oh well, “sooner rather than later” didn’t really make sense either.


6 posted on 05/30/2014 11:37:21 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

4. A computer virus is introduced into the traffic system.


7 posted on 05/30/2014 11:38:05 PM PDT by Right Brother
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Brother

That will probably not hurt Linux too much.


8 posted on 05/30/2014 11:39:41 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56
I saw dat in Total Recall, a driverless cab.

9 posted on 05/30/2014 11:45:23 PM PDT by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was blind but now I see...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

Trial Lawyers can’t wait to access Google’s deep pockets. You betcha they are in favor of this!


10 posted on 05/30/2014 11:49:24 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi or Atty General Holder, who brought more guns to Mexico?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: F15Eagle

“We hope you enjoyed the ride.”


12 posted on 05/31/2014 12:13:03 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

Just something to ponder...if I could instantly transform the entire system, that is all traffic everywhere, to driverless...would you want me to first show that the new system would result in zero accidents? Or would it be enough for me to show that the new system would result in fewer accidents than what we have now?

I’m sorta debating this with myself...


13 posted on 05/31/2014 12:13:51 AM PDT by JoeDetweiler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

Things that can also go wrong:

A playful three year old, or child of any age enters this car in CA and ends up in Kansas.

A “dear leader” has a temper tantrum and programs all conservative owned cars to drive into the ocean, off a cliff or straight to a fema camp.


14 posted on 05/31/2014 12:35:40 AM PDT by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: JoeDetweiler

Ponder this:
Presently, do cars cause accidents or the drivers?

Right now it’s the drivers. With this goofle car, the OS in the cars will cause accidents.


16 posted on 05/31/2014 12:45:31 AM PDT by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56
3. The computer system craps out, you have an accident [which would be your fault] - who gets sued ??? You, Google ???

Well, there is your pocket. And there are deep pockets (may or may not be you). And there are Very Deep Pockets (probably not you).

After all, GPS starts with G, doesn't it? So, the lawyers will pile on the one who starts with G!

17 posted on 05/31/2014 12:52:49 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Some men on this planet seem to think that computers can do a better job than a human which might be true for menial repetitive tasks but when it comes right down to it we are much more than computers will ever be. The athiest scientists are saddened that they cannot do a better job than God who they say doesn’t exist yet use his handiwork as their yardstick.


18 posted on 05/31/2014 1:05:24 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Yep I can already see the trial lawyers saying this to the young punk liberal lawyers:
19 posted on 05/31/2014 1:13:38 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Yep I can already see the trial lawyers saying this to the young punk liberal lawyers:


20 posted on 05/31/2014 1:14:04 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

If, because humans don’t have to handle every moment of driving but only have to be there to ensure there are no mishaps, there are probably billions to be saved because truckers could routinely handle 14 hour days instead of the current 12 hour days that most do.


21 posted on 05/31/2014 1:18:46 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

I see cars on the road every day which appear to have no intelligent force controlling them. A Googlemobile couldn’t be any worse.

What difference, at this point, does it make?


22 posted on 05/31/2014 1:26:02 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1_Rain_Drop
A playful three year old, or child of any age enters this car in CA and ends up in Kansas.

You'd need to have a key for the car. If a child can get access to the car, you may have a fingerprint scanner. Without that scan the car only goes to the school and back.

A “dear leader” has a temper tantrum and programs all conservative owned cars to drive into the ocean, off a cliff or straight to a fema camp.

It's like fearing that your microwave oven goes postal on you. Cars won't be remotely programmable. It is neither necessary, nor safe. All the programming will be done at the dealerships, and you can bet that it will be tamper-proof as a condition for getting insured.

23 posted on 05/31/2014 1:35:35 AM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56
What happens when the computer system hoses up on the freeway when all the traffic is moving 60 mph and there is a car riding your ass ???

The computers that run the Visa network are more reliable than humans. There are systems where you can hot-swap processor blades, as the OS migrates tasks off of the boards that you are about to pull out. Computers flew Shuttles to the orbit and back; computers assisted in Lunar landings. Even today a typical new car contains several computers. Some of these cars have cameras, they can look at the road markings, they can follow other cars, and they can park your car.

These fears are very similar to those when cars just started to appear in cities - everyone was sure that a car, moving at breakneck speed of 5 mph, will inevitably hit something within seconds.

Hardware can always be improved; humans, on the other hand, are what they are. Each human has to spend time and money to learn to drive; however all autonomous cars learn together, in parallel, and on each other's mistakes. A self-driving car's computer can easily have ten million miles of driving under its belt, in all conditions, in all cities and on all freeways, because this knowledge comes as a data file that a service tech upgrades your car with. No human can even hope to have that much experience in his lifetime.

Naturally, there will be many situations where a human must drive. For example, the police cruisers will have to have both the automatic mode (to allow the LEO to use radio, MDT, cell phone, notebook, etc.) and the manual mode (for chasing a car, if necessary.) A few days ago there was a discussion about automated trucks, and the last mile is one such place where a human may do better. But automation will work for the majority of commuters and for some professionals (contractors' trucks and vans). Some errands can be ran by the car alone - such as buying groceries online and sending a car to pick them up.

24 posted on 05/31/2014 2:04:30 AM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56; Darksheare; Tax-chick; NoCmpromiz; no-to-illegals; NicknamedBob; Monkey Face; ...

What could possibly go wrong....ping.


25 posted on 05/31/2014 2:40:31 AM PDT by moose07 (the truth will out ,one day. UKiP or Tea Party on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moose07

A lot can go wrong ... but on the other hand, what’s this we have now?


26 posted on 05/31/2014 2:42:47 AM PDT by Tax-chick (I had some wild friends ... we did some crazy things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

As a ‘back seat driver’ to supervise the proceedings, fine.
But to do all of the driving...maybe okay on a Freeway/motorway, but on other roads ,supervisory only.
Besides, why should a CPU have all the fun? :)


27 posted on 05/31/2014 2:51:03 AM PDT by moose07 (the truth will out ,one day. UKiP or Tea Party on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: moose07; Darksheare

Darks often observes that drivers pull into his place of business, thinking it’s someplace else, because their GPS tells them to. Much depends on accurate programming.


28 posted on 05/31/2014 2:52:53 AM PDT by Tax-chick (I had some wild friends ... we did some crazy things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; Darksheare

“accurate programming.”

In this instance , the programming is fine....finely ground, ,,, and roasted. :)


29 posted on 05/31/2014 2:59:37 AM PDT by moose07 (the truth will out ,one day. UKiP or Tea Party on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: moose07; Tax-chick

Yes, the GPS works off a database table.
If it is wrong, the robot won’t get you to your intended destination.
Quite often I get drivers that are absolutely adamant that my truck exit MUST be the place because “my GPS said so!”


30 posted on 05/31/2014 3:18:32 AM PDT by Darksheare (Try my coffee, first one's free..... Even robots will kill for it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

Nothing like dumbing down America even more.


31 posted on 05/31/2014 3:28:55 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoeDetweiler
if I could instantly transform the entire system, that is all traffic everywhere, to driverless...would you want me to first show that the new system would result in zero accidents? Or would it be enough for me to show that the new system would result in fewer accidents than what we have now?

Driverless vehicles are the ultimate form of liberal mass transit.

32 posted on 05/31/2014 3:54:25 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

“In many ways, Google replicated its Nevada playbook: Frame the debate. Wow potential allies with joy rides. Argue that driverless cars would make roads safer and create jobs.”

I’d want to hear that jobs argument. Subtract many hundreds of thousands of delivery drivers, taxi drivers, truck drivers, and add...what? A couple more minimum wage drones at amazon.com packing stuff into boxes for a handful of transportation company executives who now have a lighter payroll.


33 posted on 05/31/2014 4:07:54 AM PDT by jiggyboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

The notion that Google will be liable to lawsuits is ludicrous. The technology won’t become widespread until states, or possibly the feds, exclude Google and the manufacturers from liability.

A bigger concern to me is the fact that presently there are systems available to hack into some cars remotely while they are going down the road and do things like turn off the ignition and possibly control acceleration.

With the google car you have the potential for every system of the car to be remote controlled. Kinda scary.


34 posted on 05/31/2014 4:13:31 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

There are two major economic reasons for driverless vehicles.

Replace a driver with a computer. A $20,000 machine that can operate 24/7/365 with zero salary or other employee expense. Cost for five years relative to human drivers = don’t know. But a small fraction. 1/10th?

In all probability, after a shakedown period, computer-operated cars will be much less expensive to insure, and for good reason.


35 posted on 05/31/2014 4:20:14 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Yes — absolutely. People who think that trial lawyers will be allowed to get their hands on this industry in any special way are smoking crack. Laws will be written such that as long as self-driving cars are statistically less likely to cause damages can than regular cars, “statistical” type accidents will entail no special damage awards. Manufacturers will still be liable for defects that are the result of clear negligence, but that’s no different from now.

All you need to do is look at how easily Uber and Lyft have overturned a hundred years of law and practice regarding taxis and their drivers in some of the most liberal cities in the country. Liberals celebrate workers and regulation until it would actually have a cost to them — losing a far better way to get around — and when that happens, forget about it.


36 posted on 05/31/2014 4:31:53 AM PDT by only1percent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Indeed. That would be the argument for eliminating jobs — Google claims the opposite result. I want to know what kind of jobs they’re talking about, and how many.

Probably the “new normal”: another H1B from India will get the new job that is directly related to the production of the new car, and ten truck drivers will go from making a living and paying a mortgage to just scraping by at whatever part time job they can find so they can pay their rent.


37 posted on 05/31/2014 4:36:54 AM PDT by jiggyboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

Do I have to buy insurance if I’m only a passenger?


38 posted on 05/31/2014 4:58:26 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
It's like fearing that your microwave oven goes postal on you. Cars won't be remotely programmable. It is neither necessary, nor safe. All the programming will be done at the dealerships, and you can bet that it will be tamper-proof as a condition for getting insured.

"Of course, of course. It is a silly thing to be concerned about," said the NSA spokesperson.

39 posted on 05/31/2014 5:06:54 AM PDT by D Rider (Don't give sharp objects to small children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

It is IMO ridiculous to claim that these cars will create new jobs. They will, of course, while eliminating 10x or 100x that number of existing jobs.

But then anybody who thinks Walmart moving into an area creates hundreds of new jobs in the retail sector of that area would probably fall for Google’s claim.


40 posted on 05/31/2014 5:14:48 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001
Computers will one day entirely map and then mimic the architecture of the brain. Eventually their material performance will exceed the organic human brain that we know today. They may still lack a “soul” or personality buy will exceed current humans in all practical, material operations.

They will either be semi-organic systems or quantum processors that simulate an organic brain. Basically man-made brains that can interface with global networks and machines.

Will they someday be “better” than humans? Humans will have many man-made upgrades of their own by then so it is difficult to say. But the machines will definitely someday be better thinkers (by any measurable standard) than 99% of organic humans. How long it will take I don't know but it is inevitable

41 posted on 05/31/2014 5:53:30 AM PDT by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
I think this is for slow speed use, but still. It will take only one visible duck-up to give Google a black eye.

How is go◉gle going to get a black eye?

They will simply disappear it from any search results.

It never happened, down the memory hole, Citizen.

42 posted on 05/31/2014 7:34:18 AM PDT by null and void (Disarm Hollywood! No Guns for Box Office!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Greysard; COUNTrecount; Nowhere Man; FightThePower!; C. Edmund Wright; jacob allen; Travis McGee; ..
Cars won't be remotely programmable.

They are now.

OnStar can remotely shut down your car any time it pleases them.

And then there's Michael Hastings...

Nut-job Conspiracy Theory Ping!

To get onto The Nut-job Conspiracy Theory Ping List you must threaten to report me to the Mods if I don't add you to the list...

****Important!!!****

I'm starting a new job Monday. This will impact my ability to quickly ping to this list. Don't worry if I don't promptly ping list to an article you've told me about. I'll get there. Eventually.

43 posted on 05/31/2014 7:41:10 AM PDT by null and void (Disarm Hollywood! No Guns for Box Office!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Greysard

The last mile is conceptually no different than requiring a pilot familiar with the quirks of an individual harbor to supplement the ship’s captain when he gets near port.


44 posted on 05/31/2014 7:44:53 AM PDT by null and void (Disarm Hollywood! No Guns for Box Office!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Good luck with your new job!


45 posted on 05/31/2014 7:45:01 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

But driving IS a menial repetitive task. The only thing that makes driving vary at all from trip to trip is just how bad people are at it. It is exactly what computers do better than people.


46 posted on 05/31/2014 7:52:40 AM PDT by discostu (Seriously, do we no longer do "phrasing"?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan; datura
I never did get an answer to this question:
5/26/2014, 7:04:50 PM · 109 of 175
null and void to datura
Trucking companies would rather pay a human. As a trucking company owner, I know I would.

How much does a year's worth of human cost?

Please include base salary, driver insurance, certifications, healthcare, paid vacations, time lost for mandatory rest, per mile charges and other things you as a trained professional skilled in the industry would know, that I don't.


47 posted on 05/31/2014 7:55:21 AM PDT by null and void (Disarm Hollywood! No Guns for Box Office!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

Thank you! I’m really looking forward to it!


48 posted on 05/31/2014 7:55:54 AM PDT by null and void (Disarm Hollywood! No Guns for Box Office!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56

As a father of two kids who will begin driving in 10 years, nothing would please me more than having a computer handle the driving for them when that time comes. I can assure you a computer will one day make a far better driver than any 16 year old.


49 posted on 05/31/2014 8:04:30 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void; datura
Trucking companies would rather pay a human. As a trucking company owner, I know I would.

The personal preferences of company owners is about as comprehensively irrelevant as anything I can imagine. If competitors are able to cut their costs by 20%, to pick a number, and therefore undercut your price by a similar amount, you have no choice but to imitate them. Refuse to do so, and you're quickly out of business.

Used to have this discussion with those who thought businessmen in certain fields had a free choice as to whether to employ Americans or immigrants, possibly illegal ones.

They don't, of course. If doing so lowers your competition's costs and therefore prices enough, you have the choice of doing the same or going down. Which is no help to your American employees.

50 posted on 05/31/2014 8:04:54 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson