Skip to comments.California mulls how to regulate ‘driverless cars’
Posted on 03/11/2014 12:29:37 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The California Department of Motor Vehicles began Tuesday to puzzle through the complex question of how to regulate cars that rely on computersnot peopleto drive them.
Once the stuff of science fiction, driverless cars could be commercially available by decades end. Google already has sent its fleet of Priuses and Lexuses, fitted with an array of sensors, hundreds of thousands of miles in California, and major automakers are testing their own models.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
how soon will it be until we start working on a people-less congress and govt. ?
When I first saw 250 ton mine haul dump trucks running autonomously, I knew it would eventually encompass road trucks.
But it’s coming faster than I ever imagined.
Simple, just keep a total ban in place.
If it brings anything good the government will regulate it...
Insurance will be more concerned than gov’t.
A mine truck that runs the same path and not having to negotiate more complex traffic scenarios, then throw into the mix the idoits driving the non-autonomys vehicles are two completely different things.
The implications he are huge. Lets just take for example accidents
Who’s at fault?
Will the operator of any regular vehicle always be considered at fault merely because technology lacks inherent human error a real driver can have?
If there is an accident where the driverless car is at fault, who do you sue?
i feel this move towards driverless cars involves a much more sinister agenda than getting a permanent chauffer you won’t have to pay.
This is yet another attempt at more government surveillance and control. Control of your whereabouts. Control over your mileage and the ability to tax those miles. The ability of law enforcement to remotely shutdown your vehicle at. their whim.
A Komatsu haulpack on a small restricted road system at an open pit is quite a bit different than an automobile going 70 mph opposite you on an undivided highway.
If a tree falls in the forest, and there’s no one around to pay the tree-falls-in-the-forest tax, is there still a tax?
I didn’t say it will be easy or perfect.
But it’s going to happen - and yes it will happen because it gives govt control.
The progressives would rather put us in public transportation but we’re a defiant bunch. This will be another path.
I can’t speak for CA but here in MA they won’t be allowed. Only if...ONLY if...the state figures out a way to get Insurance companies to charge us more and get at least half of that money in the right pockets. Then they’ll welcome them and all the accidents with open arms.
Lefties want control of you. Freedom is so passe.
Remember Usenet groups on dial-up?
Sure you do.
Now we’re communicating at blazing speeds on our mobile wireless devices.
i wanna see one get stopped for speeding,i’d pay for that
Robot cars aren't good for big gov. People that don't drive can easily flee to America from the communist big cities and avoid public transportation. People can live farther from their jobs and drive bigger cars with beds. Jackboots are going to have to think up new reasons for harassing people and performing armed highway robbery. They are not going to give up their revenue stream.
Mr. Jones, TSA has selected a new destination for you. We'll be going to HHS Happy Joy Fun Resort 1215. Enjoy your stay.
Do these driverless vehicles have the technology capaable of distinguishing various traffic situations and road signs? Wil they automatically connect with other like vehicles. Doubt it! This means there’s going to be a need for massive ammounts of expensive tech infrastructure everywhere. Who’s going to pay for it? Take the expense of a somewhat localized high speed rail project and multiply that by every city. So unless you ban all standard vehicles and force every person who drives to buy a new driverless car, it’s just not possible much less feasible not to mention just not as much fun.
It’s a pipedream much like the flying car!
I don’t think anyone here is questioning driverless cars from a technical viewpoint. Predicting the advancement of technology is easy since it always does. What is different in this case are legal and government oversight issues. It’s easy to find the defendant in a legal case and determine blame if flattened into a pancake at Bingham Canyon. Not so much if vaporized by a car-drone on a public highway. The subject might make a good futuristic spy novel.
Since this plays right into goverment’s desire to control, I believe that will ride roughshod over the regulatory issues.
The technology already exists and will be slowly introduced.
Initially they will probably designate a few lanes on highways for automated vehicles only. Eventually they will be mandatory...
There’s nothing sinister in it, it’s just the normal evolution of technology. People have been trying to make self driving cars for decades. When the first self parking car hit we knew it was any day now. It’s surveillance or control, especially since NONE of the current example involve any kind of government action at all, it’s GPS driven no checking into some central anything.
But it’s going to be really really rough for the government to figure out. Do we need a drivers license to let the car drive? If not what’s the age limit? What about drunk riding?
Yes they can distinguish traffic situations and road signs (or at least will be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Grand_Challenge ). And they probably will communicate with each other, most cars are bluetooth capable already for your cellphone no reason they can’t talk to each other. And they’ll be doing that specifically to accomplish this DECADES any massive infrastructure can be put in place. The control system was the idea people had 10 to 20 years ago, but self parking cars proved that wasn’t necessary, we can make cars see and react to conditions all by themselves right now. Cars are coming out now that will self brake if they detect something in the way, even line you back up in your lane if you drift. We’re almost there, with no supervising network.
“Do these driverless vehicles have the technology capaable of distinguishing various traffic situations and road signs?”
“Wil they automatically connect with other like vehicles. Doubt it! This means theres going to be a need for massive ammounts of expensive tech infrastructure everywhere.”
No it doesn’t. As the article points out, Google already has logged hundreds of thousands of miles of driverless driving on public streets.
“Take the expense of a somewhat localized high speed rail project and multiply that by every city. So unless you ban all standard vehicles and force every person who drives to buy a new driverless car, its just not possible much less feasible not to mention just not as much fun.”
No. The driverless cars work similarly to a human driver. They sense their surroundings, and make decisions. They make decisions several times a second, and can “see” in all directions at the same time. They have “senses” humans don’t, like laser radar. Further, they don’t get distracted, tired or drunk.
There won’t be much question what happened in the event of an accident, as the driverless car will contain a detailed record. They’ll be much better at avoiding errant human drivers than are humans.
There are concerns, like cost, how much redundancy the various systems will provide, and failure modes, but there’s little doubt the roads will get safer proportionally to the number of driverless cars out there.
For examples, check out the following video links:
Note that the last one shows the autonomous vehicles stopping for random pedestrians. I was surprised at how advanced the technology has become. For more information about the developments in San Antonio, check out: http://www.swri.org/4org/d10/isd/ivs/marti.htm .
Shoot them on sight, spirits in vehicles, if the cops cannot intimidate or ticket they will be the ones keeping them off the road.
Troppers say NO to R2D2 behind the wheel.
Thanks for the videos, I hadn’t seen those. Low speed / offroad for the most part (military applications) but interesting.
One thing I didn’t mention in my earlier post is that the big win with autonomous cars is the free time. Instead of the essentially mindless task of driving, we’ll be able to read, work, and whatever else is a good use of time. :-)
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.