12 ms·
US to Allow Cars Without Steering Wheels
- jiveturkey 8y agoAlso, US to allow cars without turn signals. Automakers are excited to reduce cost for this unused system.
- GiorgioG 8y agoYou may as well, it's a coin toss as to whether someone will use their turn signals...
- _verandaguy 8y agoNone are more excited than BMW, who will unfortunately still have to ship to EMEA with this otherwise-unused feature.
- gautamdivgi 8y agoIf you drive downtown in a major US city - it may be a reasonable claim that the turn signals are useless.
- inostia 8y agoDefinitely not the case for signaling to bicyclists and motorcyclists. Intent needs to be communicated as clearly as possible. It bothers me when drivers in the city do not use their turn signals.
- longerthoughts 8y ago> It bothers me when drivers in the city do not use their turn signals. I will never understand this. In the case of people who sometimes use signals but not always, it must take more mental energy to evaluate the situation and decide than reflexively signalling every time you turn or change lanes. In the case of people who never signal, it must be much harder to navigate a city when nobody knows what you're trying to do.
- monksy 8y agoWait what? You're a cyclist.. how do you know about the rules of the road?
- the_clarence 8y agoWhat? As a pedestrian I hate drivers who do not use their turn signals.
- jlebar 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law :)
- the_clarence 8y agoI was serious
- LinuxBender 8y agoHave fun with that! You won't find me in one of those.
- cortesoft 8y agoEver? No matter what advancements are made with the technology? You sound like someone who would have said you would never ride in a carriage that didn't have a horse.
- newswriter99 8y agoI don't think this is as much of a troglodyte statement as much as it is a lack of personal autonomy and freedom. The user isn't against the horse-less carriage out of fear, he's against the horse-less carriage because the option to control the horse has also been removed.
- jstanley 8y agoIt is possible that a self-driving car could still give you personal autonomy. Although you would lose direct mechanical control over the car, it is still technically possible to implement a self-driving car that always goes exactly where the occupant tells it to, without ever phoning home. Of course, none of the companies making self-driving cars actually want that, and most of the people buying them either don't care or don't realise, so it's probably not going to happen.
- samstave 8y agoYeah no thanks. "jstaney you are under arrest - remain calm your vehicle will deliver you to the nearest processing facility. Do not attempt to control the vehicle. Do not attempt to exit the vehicle. Any action deemed as attempting to exit the vehicle or prevent it from arriving at the detention facility will result in your immediate admission of guilt and the appropriate sentencing will commence. Have a nice day, thank you for using GovCloud Services."
- alrs 8y agoJoystick, bring it back: https://www.wired.com/2015/01/well-didnt-work-saabs-weird-joystick-controlled-car-wasnt-super-idea/ https://www.wired.com/2015/01/well-didnt-work-saabs-weird-jo...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- logfromblammo 8y agoIt just wasn't a long enough stick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiller
- jacquesm 8y agoCitroen almost did that too on the SM. That is why the steering is so ridiculously sensitive.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoBRB, buying stock in Stanley Black and Decker[1] [1]https://www.supermotors.net/getfile/801863/fullsize/7824_103865566294398_100000128645696_102519_39.jpg https://www.supermotors.net/getfile/801863/fullsize/7824_103... Seriously though, why was this ever a law in the first place?
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoTiller steering is dangerous, that's why. I know of someone who did that to a lawnmower and had it ripped out of his hand only to swing around and split his hand open.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoAny non-power assisted system can hit you back hard in the right conditions. If something is regularly a pain in the butt to operate then it's going to go away, just like manual steering, synchronized transmissions, non-power assisted brakes and hand crank starters. No need for a law.
- GrumpiNerd 8y agoI think you meant "non-synchronized transmissions".
- eximius 8y agoIs no one going to mention how stupid the concept photo looks? If you don't have a steering wheel, why wouldn't you have a console for the driver or per person? If I have nothing else better to do, I'd want the controls the driver will interact with to be more accessible to the driver.
- zacwest 8y agoThere's no driver position, though. It could be the left or the right side. Perhaps for drive-thru reasons people would prefer the left, but there's not a lot of required left-handedness when you're not driving.
- eximius 8y ago'primary passenger' then. And my initial thought was that there should be two consoles, then I reverted back to a single console for the driver without making the final leap to, 'oh wait, there is no driver'.
- icebraining 8y agoSeems OK to me. Why increase costs and unreliability by adding extra screens and controls? As for having it "for the driver", that's old-car thinking. In this car, both front seats are equivalent, there's no need to select one as "the driver".
- eximius 8y ago> unreliability of what? The entertainment? If having two screens reduces the safety of the vehicle, it isn't a vehicle I want to be in.
- icebraining 8y agoNo, I mean there's more stuff that can break.
- 8y ago
- jaxtellerSoA 8y agoI'll keep my gasoline car with a steering wheel....thanks.
- marter 8y agoNot for long
- coldtea 8y agoYou'd be surprised. Self driving cars will have their AI-winter time soon (not to imply that they hit the spotlight yet)
- ggggtez 8y agoI think it would be surprising if self driving cars didn't launch in the next 10 years. Consider that most people never drive more than 10 miles from their home on a given day. It's pretty trivial to imagine even "limited" AI vehicles being able to serve vast swaths of the population. In that case, likely a lot of people would want to not have to invest in the hefty price of owning, maintaining, and insuring a vehicle, let alone driving which everyone knows is more dangerous than most things a person does in a given day.
- linuxftw 8y ago> Consider that most people never drive more than 10 miles from their home on a given day. This is simply untrue if you're considering average commute distance of drivers in major cities. > hefty price of owning, maintaining, and insuring a vehicle These costs are highly variable, and many reasonable options are quite cheap. I don't see self-driving cars catching on any time soon in the US. Possibly in Europe. I think they will be limited to smaller vehicles that operate in glorified bike lines, only on known routes.
- Falling3 8y ago> This is simply untrue if you're considering average commute distance of drivers in major cities. I'm sure that'd be correct if you'd said suburbs and rural areas, but according to this[0], the average commute for almost every major city is under 10 miles. [0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-the-typical-commutes-for-every-big-metro-area-2015-03-25 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-the-typical-commu...
- WiseWeasel 8y agoFrom page 26 of the NHTSA's report[1]: >The Model State Policy confirms that States retain their traditional responsibilities for vehicle licensing and registration, traffic laws and enforcement, and motor vehicle insurance and liability regimes while outlining the Federal role for HAVs. Surely, liability for Level 4 autonomy vehicles would be borne by the car's manufacturer, rather than the operator. Is that maybe one of the more controversial aspects separating the definitions of Level 4 and 5 autonomy? I'm surprised this would remain unregulated at the federal level. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/12532-nhtsa-strategicplan-2016-2020.pdf https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/12...
- ams6110 8y agoLiability generally goes with the owner of the vehicle, not the manufacturer or the operator (with some exceptions perhaps for proven manufacturing defects).
- WiseWeasel 8y agoWhy would the operator be liable for an accident for which they’re powerless to have prevented?
- jhasse 8y agoThey could have prevented it by not buying a self-driving car.
- WiseWeasel 8y agoThe manufacturer could have prevented it by supplying a vehicle capable of avoiding collisions. I certainly understand the owner/operator having some form of liability insurance based on usage, but an at-fault collision shouldn't be the responsibility of the owner or operator, nor should it affect their rates. That fault lies entirely with the manufacturer, or maybe eventually the subsystem supplier. Thinking about it, I'd not be terribly surprised if it plays out with manufacturers successfully lobbying to avoid any liability, and insurance gets pooled among owners of specific Level 4 autonomy subsystems. Maybe the best we can hope for would be an equitable split of liability between the manufacturer (who controls the behavior) and owner (who controls the level of usage).
- zepearl 8y agoI'm looking forward at the handling of the "corner cases" related to society. E.g. somebody that wants to rob you could just stand in front of your car (or put some small obstacle) knowing that the car will stop (to avoid damaging itself and/or whatever is in front of it). Even in the case of simpler tech which is generally available already today some unexpected problems might arise once people become really aware that it exists on 99% of the vehicles. For example, in the case of an at least partially selfish person, why should s/he wait to cross the street if s/he knows that the car that is nearing has an anti-collision/auto-break system? I admit that I might even start doing that myself whenever I'm late for something, have to catch the bus, etc... :) Might end up being a funny experience sitting in a car that has to do emergency breaking every other minute... :)
- drdrey 8y agoOr using salt https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ywwba5/meet-the-artist-using-ritual-magic-to-trap-self-driving-cars https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ywwba5/meet-the-artist-us...
- GhostVII 8y agoMaybe that would be a good way of making cities more human friendly instead of car friendly - if you want to cross the road, just go for it and the cars will stop or avoid you. Probably not a good idea on highways and fast roads obviously.
- zepearl 8y agoInteresting point of view - this might be the real end result of the implementation of such automation. Still, some details will be tricky to solve... .
- EamonnMR 8y agoMost passengers won't want concussions and/or bit tongues from frequent high-speed stops due to impatient pedestrians.
- 8y ago
- exitcode00 8y agoFinally the elites have invented a suicide booth for us miserable opiate addicted masses. Wish it was more affordable though... I hope the computer comes with a steering "app"
- Myrmornis 8y ago> Mr Hamilton: Couldn't find the freeway. Had to take a little back street called the M5. > Basil: Well I'm sorry it wasn't wide enough for you. A lot of the English cars have steering wheels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48ufCZRkl5Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48ufCZRkl5Y
- costcopizza 8y agoSigh. They'll gladly welcome anything self-driving it seems, but refuse to budge on headlight laws. https://www.wired.com/2017/01/bad-audis-swanky-new-headlights-arent-allowed-us/ https://www.wired.com/2017/01/bad-audis-swanky-new-headlight...
- mpnordland 8y agoForgive me if I'm missing something here, but could they not just... add another light? Put this _and_ another LED system for the low beams?
- zepearl 8y agoIt would change their mainline design (the new "country-specific" look most probably not looking as good as the original one) + having a different design (only for the US market, especially involving the front part which is extremely important in the general look) might probably have to be marketed under a different name (e.g not "A4" but "A4us") with all kind of repercussions on in/direct costs of all kinds (storage space for replacement parts, marketing, research on future evolution, ...). Additionally, accepting a request from a specific country might trigger a chain-reaction from other countries, multiplying what stated above by the nbr of countries (and I personally don't think that it would be a linear curve as at the same time the costs for coordination between the multiple lines would rise).
- rcdmd 8y agoFrom the article, "Because the manufacturers haven’t yet proven there is significant enough life-safety benefit to a laser-based matrix system, regulatory reworking is a tough sell." Because of the regulations, the burden is on the manufacturer to show the matrix light technology is actually safer than the traditional one.
- nightski 8y agoIs there any evidence whatsoever this increases safety? In my experience driving at night, traffic with led lights are so obnoxious it's almost worse than high beams with traditional headlights.
- nerpderp83 8y agoThese cars must have a little pop-out joystick to maneuver it around in a garage or during repair? There should be a standardized control that pops out of the dash using a fixed icon, so that anyone can enable an override. Nuts.
- crooked-v 8y agoParking valets in ultra-cramped garages come particularly to mind for me, after having watched a group of attendants perform an elaborate repositioning of a dozen cars in one of those mechanical-car-lift parking areas with barely enough free space to fit a single car at a time.
- aidenn0 8y agoThey'll probably put something on the CAN bus for manual maneuvering.
- zepearl 8y agoThe article's subtitle states "New voluntary guidelines from NHTSA will allow cars specifically designed for Level 4 autonomous driving on the road" The first link in the article's body points to "https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOCUMENT/ROAD-AHEAD" https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOCUMENT/ROAD-AHEAD" which redirects to "https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/12532-nhtsa-strategicplan-2016-2020.pdf" https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/12... => I did search for the strings "level 4" and level4" but did not get any hits => which page(s) is/are used as foundation for the article's subtitle mentioning "level 4"? EDIT: None of the links that I posted work directly (they're accessible only through https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/new-rules-of-the-road-allow-steeringwheelfree-cars https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/sel... in the area at the top which states "blah blah... said today in an 80-page report") - don't know why the direct links aren't working... .
- SilverSlash 8y agoThis is just stupid. Why would you ever want to completely remove the driving experience? It should be so that I can drive when I want to, and let go when I don't want to.
- mr_toad 8y agoMost (all?) of these cars would be used as taxis, so you wouldn’t be allowed to drive anyway.
- jaxtellerSoA 8y ago> so you wouldn’t be allowed to drive anyway Oh yea this is great idea. Lets all just not own cars. I can't wait to wait 10 min for a automated taxi to arrive, where the interior is left gross and nasty by the previous riders who were doing God know what inside. Also if you ever need to leave in a hurry (get a call that a loved one is the hospital, etc.) and need to leave right the fuck now, too bad. Also when your shitty taxi arrives it won't go any faster, it is programmed to never break the speed limit. Sounds like fucking HELL. NO WAY, NEVER, EVER, EVER. I will fight to the death to keep manually driven cars.
- glenrivard 8y agoWhat will be interesting to see is how other safety standards change. Look at windows in cars today and being able to see. It drives car designs. But with SDC it is not longer needed to make seeing how necessary and therefore would allow cars to be made completely differently. That is what I am most interested to see. Today Waymo and others are just using "regular" cars. Waymo has purchased up to 82k cars which are Fiat Mini Vans and Jaguar i-Pace. Would hope Waymo at some point buys the capability to make their own cars and start designing cars optimized for SDC. Waymo parent now has over $100B in cash with less than $5B debt. Ten years ago Jaguar and Land Rover combined sold to Tata forr $2.8B. So would not be any problem for Waymo parent to buy equivalent. Or even outsource a lot of it like the i-Pace was outsourced to Magna.