23 ms·
U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles
- beardyw 5y agoIf your vehicle is heading relentlessly toward a group of schoolchildren it would be nice to have a way to override it. Either that or no windows so you won't be haunted by it every night of your life.
- pluc 5y agoWe have the technology to replace schoolchildren at a much lower cost than cars
- lupire 5y agoWe don't have inexpensive cloning and rapid growth technology.
- roamerz 5y agoComment of the day. Thanks for the laugh.
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoNot all of us laugh. My first grandchild is going to be named for a childhood friend of my daughter, who was killed by a car. My daughter still hurts, 15 years later.
- renewiltord 5y agoThat is indeed sad and it’s true there’s always someone carrying trauma about something. That’s life. But it goes on. That’s why sometimes I say “kill all the apaches” and don’t even think twice about the fact that many Native American tribesmen were killed in the conquest of this nation. I think it’s sensible not to optimize to the person with the most trauma.
- robbrown451 5y agoSad story. I hope she reconsiders naming her daughter for the girl who died tragically. My sister was named for a cousin that, as a baby, fell out a window to her death, a decade or so before my sister was born. When my sister was a couple weeks old, my parents realized that they didn't want to think of that tragic story every time they said my sister's name. So they changed her name to one without the emotional baggage. There are other ways to honor someone's memory, that don't affect your relationship with your new child.
- nhumrich 5y ago> much lower cost than cars Spoken like someone who has never been a parent.
- visarga 5y agoWould that include the piano and karate lessons for the replacement kids?
- datavirtue 5y agoCoding bootcamp and Krav Maga these days.
- gruez 5y agoWhat kind of cars are we talking about? A second grader is aged 7-8. Let's round that up to 8 years to include 9 months of gestation. A model Y starts at $55k. For them to be equal in cost to "replace", the child would need to cost more than $6,875/year to raise. Can you hire a full time nanny for that price? My guess is that the amount of resources/money invested into a child at that age is in the hundreds of thousands.
- TheCoelacanth 5y agoNo way. They only seem cheaper because of people doing free labor to produce their own children. Even just the cost to get someone else to produce a newborn for you is almost enough to buy a Bentley.
- coffeeblack 5y ago“Self driving” means that it is far more likely for a human driver to override the car in panic and hit the children than it is for the car to hit the children autonomously.
- warmwaffles 5y agoIF the car does hit the children even while driving autonomously the driver will be held responsible regardless of overrides. If someone dies, someone is going to jail until the justice system works through it.
- TillE 5y agoThere is no "driver" in this scenario, aside from the software.
- dahfizz 5y agoDid you read the article? There is literally no steering wheel in an autonomous car. There is no "driver", only passengers. Even then, the car could drive itself without any passengers.
- goodpoint 5y agoNo steering wheel does not imply no responsibility.
- yazaddaruvala 5y agoI mean, it kind of does. I do agree tho, “no steering wheel, no responsibility” should be explicit in law.
- dane-pgp 5y agoPresumably you mean "no responsibility for the owner", and the responsibility should be borne by the manufacturer. I'm not sure if that's the right set of incentives for society, though. If the owner is responsible for any deaths caused by their car, the owner will have an incentive to choose a car that has a good safety record, and to keep that car in proper working order. Conversely, if a corporation is responsible, they can only be punished with fines for causing a fatal accident, and those fines will be considered a cost of doing business. Also, the corporation will have a lot more money to invest in lobbying for laws (and judges) to make those fines as small as possible. Let us not forget the infamous "Pinto Memo": https://www.spokesman.com/blogs/autos/2008/oct/17/pinto-memo-its-cheaper-let-them-burn/ https://www.spokesman.com/blogs/autos/2008/oct/17/pinto-memo...
- digbybk 5y agoI'm not sure if I'm optimistic about autonomous vehicles or just very pessimistic about human drivers. I have no confidence that the next driver making a left turn while I'm crossing the road won't kill me. I'm much more comfortable with a computer that is programmed to avoid killing me, even if the software may have the occasional bug, than with a human who may or may not prioritize my life over whatever else it is they have going on that day.
- forbiddenvoid 5y agoLiterally, when my dad taught me to drive, the first thing he told me was: 'Every other driver on the road is an idiot and a murderer. Act accordingly.'
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- robbrown451 5y agoSo, don't go onto public roads at all?
- bluGill 5y agoToday I'm not sure which I have more confidence in. However long term I'm confident that we can eliminate enough bugs that the autonomous vehicle is better. Once statistics start to come out (real ones that account for all factors, not potentially biases ones from the company making the cars) I'll be looking for the time when we ban non-autonomous cars.
- bluefirebrand 5y ago> I'm much more comfortable with a computer that is programmed to avoid killing me I think the real concern that the car is actually programmed explicitly to kill you if it has to, to ensure it's own safety or the safety of it's riders or something.
- sweetbitter 5y ago
- qgin 5y agoThere will always be a big red disconnect button in all of these vehicles. Though using it is probably more likely to cause an accident than not using it.
- flint 5y agoWho's going to underwrite the insurance?
- yazaddaruvala 5y agoVery likely large fleets like Waymo / Cruise / Tesla will be self insured.
- firstSpeaker 5y agoNo steering wheels or brake pedals! Feels scary but we are giving technology way more control over our lives already :-).
- laurent92 5y agoThe usecase of minibuses with a joystick for command and a red emergency button is legit. We have this in France, not only for airports.
- schleck8 5y agoAfter removing the steering wheel and making the car fully autonomous, I bet you'll have to pay a subscription for it to drive. And a subscription for a cellular service.
- jdlshore 5y agoIt’s unlikely autonomous cars will be privately owned.
- candiddevmike 5y agoLooking forward to the future of having to leave 40 mins earlier so I can mark multiple vehicles as "need cleaning" before having one arrive that won't give me hepatitis.
- ear7h 5y agoAnd then they could optimize the model for efficiency by picking up multiple people that share similar routes. It could even become a public service!
- signatoremo 5y agothis sounds like a snarky remark, but a hybrid public transportation mode where an autonomous van can pick up people at their convenience is exactly desirable, more than the public bus or train today. Less walking, less waiting, on demand connection.
- HPsquared 5y agoI think any automated vehicle, no matter how advanced, should always have a big red button to make it stop whatever it's doing. Kind of like the emergency brake on a passenger train.
- hef19898 5y agoYou mean like machinery in factories? Sounds like a revolutionary idea!
- asah 5y agothat would be two hands on the wheel and pulled them away stops the device. https://www.google.com/search?q=machinery+two+hand+control https://www.google.com/search?q=machinery+two+hand+control
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- awb 5y agoMaybe a “stop gracefully” mode? If you hit the big red button going 65mph on the center lane of a crowded highway, it could be bad. Especially if the tech starts to feel safe enough that cars can travel close enough to use the draft from cars ahead. I think an emergency brake works for trains because they’re isolated.
- ra7 5y agoThey do have a "pull over" physical button. You can see them on Waymo vehicles. The car finds a safe spot to pull over when you hit it.
- hackernewds 5y agoCould be an absurd idea, but could require a licensed driver with experience taking over the wheel instead to steer the car with human logic, instead of trusting the failing AI to park it Oh wait..
- 5y ago
- ASinclair 5y agoI took my first self-driving ride last night. One of the wildest parts was watching the steering wheel and hearing the pedals move on their own.
- ape4 5y agoI wonder if something makes the wheel turn which actually turns the car. Or is the wheel just a visual indicator.
- AlexandrB 5y agoMost cars still have some aspect of mechanical coupling between the steering wheel and the front wheels in case of electrical failure. There are some cars that have had "steer by wire", but it's still very uncommon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire#Steer_by_wire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drive_by_wire#Steer_by_wire
- numpad0 5y agoI think it's notable that Steer by Wire on Infiniti Q50 was a reverted change: users apparently wanted anti-torques and vibrations from steering as a cue/driving input.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y agoI would not own a car that was steer-by-wire because of the risk of electrical failure. I've had electrical failure in a car before. The alternator died and wouldn't produce enough power at under 2000 rpm. My stereo and lights were flickering and engine was sputtering. In a steer-by-wire system, I'd have lost my steering. I'm just glad I was driving a stick shift, giving me more control over engine speeds so I was able to make it home and not have to get a tow.
- AtlasBarfed 5y agoLook, I'm generally on the bull-ish side of autonomous driving, but this is almost akin to the feds passing laws on science fiction. Section 180.99 part alpha: "Minimum size of a Ringworld is mercury orbit around a red dwarf" I guess we can always drive with a USB-plugin gamepad if there's a glitch or a central system outage? This would actually represent progress if they eliminated the requirement for side mirrors, which from what I've read of good aerodynamic designs is responsible for as much drag as the body of the car.
- TillE 5y ago> if they eliminated the requirement for side mirrors Of course fully automated vehicles will look nothing like typical cars. There's this really common tendency to think way too small, to confuse the current prototypes with a final product. The mid-term future for SDVs looks more or less like a train compartment on wheels.
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago>a train compartment on wheels. // A bus? Yes, autonomous public vehicles seem likely - like a Flexi-bus - but people like to travel without random members of the public, private hire of small vehicles will definitely be a thing unless the public get priced out of it.
- myrmidon 5y ago> which from what I've read of good aerodynamic designs is responsible for as much drag as the body of the car. This seems way too high to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient says side mirrors contribute 2-7% drag. Still worth removing them of course, I'm just correcting you to prevent people from picking up wrong numbers.
- AtlasBarfed 5y agoI think I got that "as much as the rest of the body" from the Aptera newsfeeds. The Aptera claims some ridiculous efficiencies so who knows.
- pizza 5y agoReading between the lines here this just makes me think that the regulator has become captured by the industry. This is like removing human control on an autonomous Russian roulette revolver that shoots to the side if it detects a person in front of the barrel, then praying for the best.
- walkhour 5y agoDriving is already a Russian roulette right? If autonomous vehicles are safer than human drivers as advertised the barrel would just have more capacity.
- pydry 5y agoSelf driving cars will be as safe as the level of criminal liability faced by the makers. Regulatory capture means it wont be high and the potential profits to be realized from first mover advantage here means there will be a significant incentive to "move fast and break things". So to speak. I'd feel safe if an executive who OKs a software update that kills someone risks significant jail time. If that means no self driving cars for 20 more years then I am totally fine with that. That would simply mean that they werent safer as promised.
- snarf21 5y agoI agree that there is a significant monetary incentive to "move fast and kill people". In the end, paying out a few $MM to random families is financially minimal compared to the $BBB that are up for grabs. We will never really have executives going to jail for things like this. We've built a system of profits > anything else.
- goodpoint 5y agoThis has been the status quo for the whole car industry for decades. If executives were jailed for car accidents people we would have trains and trams in every corner.
- mnd999 5y agoThis is akin to removing the requirement for unicorns to wear horseshoes on the public road.
- hackernewds 5y agoHow so?
- pyhtel 5y agoI'm guessing because fully automated vehicles don't exist (yet).
- rascul 5y agoIsn't Waymo doing this already?
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoSee anyone riding unicorns around recently? Exactly. Legacy regulations governing the occupant compartment are not yet a practical impediment for self driving cars because they haven't got that far yet. Realistically what the removal of this regulation means is that some hypothetical future company with an autonomous yard spotter can drive the thing 500yd down the public way from warehouse B to warehouse C without the legal department getting antsy.
- pfortuny 5y agoThis is so much so... It looks silly (your comment) but it is spot on.
- oneoff786 5y agoCool. So strap a horn on your horse and free hoof it.
- walkhour 5y agoDoesn't the analogy fail given autonomous vehicles are eventually possible and pursued and unicorns not?
- yxwvut 5y agoWhat's going to be the rate of 'acceptable loss'? There's an obvious point on the cost curve where companies will begin pushing for driverless tech before the problem is fully solved. Without some standardized 'miles between intervention' requirement that accounts for the externality on innocent bystanders, the emergent behavior will be to remove the human in the loop before the societally optimal point. If I save $100M in staffing costs by firing all my human monitors and only incur $10M in payouts to the people my cars run over, the capitalist choice is clear.
- JohnJamesRambo 5y agoElon’s way ahead of the curve on this one. Unfortunately.
- superkuh 5y agoWell, the USA has decided that 1000 deaths/day is acceptable and ignorable as background mortality for sars-cov-2. I don't believe that autonomous cars are actually feasible in environments that aren't arid/flat Arizona that doesn't have winter so it's kind of a moot point. There isn't and will not be an autonomous car that can drive on winter, snow covered roads with emergent (incorrect) paths that humans flock and follow. If the car does the right thing it'll kill people. But 1000/day? I think they can probably come in under that.
- readams 5y agoThe US department of transportation values a human life at around $10M. So they're willing to spend that amount to statistically save one person. You do need a number though. People don't like to think about it but you can't value a life at infinity.
- awb 5y ago> What's going to be the rate of 'acceptable loss'? You might think anything less than the current incident rate. But that’s looking at it from a group perspective. From an individual perspective, I’ve never been in an accident in ~25 years of driving, so my requirements might be higher than others to feel like autonomous control is safer.
- 5y ago
- api 5y agoIf we think we have class antagonism and rural vs. urban antagonism now, wait until self-driving trucks decimate trucking as an industry. It's one of the largest well-paying employers of "blue collar" people. We are still a ways off but it's definitely coming. We have to do something about inequality or we will have totalitarianism. It will either be in the form of a totalitarian fascist or communist revolution, or a totalitarian police state to prevent such a revolution.
- piyh 5y agoOne of my favorite youtubers did an hour long video on the trucker convoy from California to DC and it was a peak into another world. The thing I thought about after watching it was wondering what it looks like when that group has mass unemployment in 10 years. Truck driving employs 1% of the US population and if those jobs are lost to automation, there's no chance of them coming back like they did throughout other recessions. It won't just be the drivers, it'll be their friends, families and children that will be unemployed, unhappy, and very motivated. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKcJrBRVZn4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKcJrBRVZn4
- api 5y agoI'm going to submit that some of these COVID protests are not COVID protests. They are inequality protests, but seriously talking about inequality has been pushed out of the Overton window across much of the American political landscape. As a result the anger "sublimates" out about other issues. The right does a good job guiding the anger of the working class toward issues that have nothing to do with inequality like COVID, race, immigrants, trans people, etc. Meanwhile the left offers up a totally out of touch message that doesn't resonate at all, or offers them welfare without understanding that these people consider welfare to be something to be ashamed about. They want productive work. You know... we have a housing crisis in this country. A lot of these people could find work building adequate housing for the US population, but that would threaten high real estate valuations... We also have a lot of infrastructure that needs building, but we may have to wait for the generation that was brainwashed to believe that infrastructure (except more roads) is communism to retire. There are plenty of jobs but we won't create them. We'd better get on it.
- zaps 5y agoThose men know what it means to turn the keys, and some are just not up to it! Now, it's as simple as that! I think we oughta take the men out of the loop.
- mindcrime 5y agoWe've had men in those cars since before any of you guys were watching "Howdy Doody"! Now I myself sleep pretty well knowing those boys are driving.
- KaoruAoiShiho 5y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30560349 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30560349
- zekrioca 5y agoThe first sentence of this article has an interesting reading: "U.S. regulators on Thursday issued final rules eliminating the need for automated vehicle manufacturers to equip fully autonomous vehicles with manual driving controls to meet crash standards." It does sound like "U.S. regulators are removing regulations.", which does look like they are acting against themselves..
- imajoredinecon 5y agoRegulators are responsible for maintaining sets of rules that are just as comprehensive as they need to be and no more. Part of the job description is updating or removing old rules, just like part of it is creating new ones.
- zekrioca 5y agoMaybe you misread it, and/or maybe I miswrote it, and/or maybe both. But I meant about the phrasing and my understanding of it, not about the actual job of a regulator.
- knubie 5y agoAre programmers removing code acting against themselves?
- giantg2 5y agoThis is like the least important area of this topic, and like 100 steps ahead of where we are now.
- t_h_r_o_w_away 5y agoBut government!
- giantg2 5y agoIt's a great example of how companies with money can lobby to get things that don't matter changed, while ordinary citizens can't get the government to fix broken regulations that are having an actual impact on our lives.
- dghughes 5y agoWhat if the autonomous vehicle is on a curve next to a cliff and loses power? Maybe ejection seats requirement should be an added clause.
- mellavora 5y agoI like the submarine feature, also. Why doesn't Bond get cool cars anymore?
- amelius 5y agoAnd so the slippery slope becomes more slippery.
- hadlock 5y agoIt's unlikely that antique/classic cars will ever be banned, although getting gas may start becoming harder to come by in 2050.
- nixass 5y agoThis will never fly in Europe. So the cars will have both system regardless
- xwdv 5y agoThey could just not sell those cars in Europe
- sumo89 5y agoWhere's that video of the guy's dash cam showing what full autonomous driving in a Tesla is currently like, the one where it keeps trying to drive him head first in to other vehicles. I'm hoping this is just intended for on-campus shuttles or something.
- anthropodie 5y ago> I'm hoping this is just intended for on-campus shuttles or something. Or those Jurassic park like vehicles
- shadowgovt 5y agoTesla is not representative of the state-of-the-art in the industry. In fact, many of the other companies in the space are looking down their nose at Tesla's experiment because Musk thinks he can do the trick without LIDAR. He might not be wrong (humans do it without LIDAR), but it's a hell of a gamble that results in a sensor bundle quite different from the sensory tapestry other self-driving vehicles can take advantage of. Couple that with the fact that other companies are employing professional drivers to test their hardware on public roads while Musk is crowdsourcing it to anyone rich enough to buy one of his cars, and one can get the sense why those who are actually concerned about driver and pedestrian safety are real nervous about Musk's foray into this space.
- aejnsn 5y agoThe first person to get hit (in their non-automated vehicle) with the automated vehicle being at fault will have a field day with this in court.
- dopylitty 5y agoThis feels like getting the cart before the horse. As far as I’m aware (and as has been proven by car companies’ continuing inability to produce a safely self driving vehicle) there’s no standard test for what counts as an ”automated driving system (ADS) vehicle” capable of safely navigating public roads. Regulators shouldn’t just take for profit companies’ word that a vehicle is automated. There should be a standard battery of tests which a vehicle must pass to be considered automated. Allowing companies to get rid of controls just because they pinky swear the vehicle can handle driving safely in all foreseeable conditions is a sure way to end up with needless death and injury due to the same dynamics that were written in the book Unsafe at any Speed. The safety and regulatory framework should exist before the activity is allowed rather than waiting until the inevitable deaths and injuries and relying on the families of the deceased to petition congress.
- 999900000999 5y agoThis is a great step forward, autonomous driving only needs to be better than the average human. The average human is often too busy texting, or eating to pay attention. Humans do very stupid things in cars, it's a part of why I won't really consider living anywhere where I have to own one. Holy crap, you'll see people literally just rear-end each other at stoplights because you want to keep itching closer. One of the most common complaints about automated cars is they go The speed limit, I recall once I was literally at the exact speed limit for the highway and I flicked on the cruise control. Immediately a driver behind me started honking and flicking me off. Like holy shit I'm not from around here. I'm not going to risk getting pulled over because you're 5 minutes late to brunch or something. The average human is such a horrible driver. I don't think Tesla bots can do much worse. The times the Tesla AI fails are very rare and far between, the times some idiot human decides they're going to rear end someone, or change lanes to late are very common. All hell the robocar overlords
- Communitivity 5y agoThis is problematic for a number of reasons. The most important in my mind is that the risk of the vehicle being hacked and carjacked remotely is always present. With the presence of an automation kill-switch and manual human controls the driver can always take back control. Without those, the driver is at the mercy of the hacker. Vehicle automation falls under the SCADA sub-domain of cyber-security. SCADA stands for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, and the cyber-security in SCADA systems is light-years behind. Pro-tip: going into cyber and want a good certification (if such a thing exists)..then get CISSP-SCADA. Some relevant articles: [1] https://physicsworld.com/a/how-to-hack-a-self-driving-car/ https://physicsworld.com/a/how-to-hack-a-self-driving-car/ [2] https://hackernoon.com/how-to-hack-self-driving-cars-vulnerabilities-in-autonomous-vehicles-jh3r37cz https://hackernoon.com/how-to-hack-self-driving-cars-vulnera... [3] https://blog.tesu.edu/should-we-be-worried-about-the-hacking-of-autonomous-vehicles https://blog.tesu.edu/should-we-be-worried-about-the-hacking...
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> With the presence of an automation kill-switch and manual human controls the driver can always take back control Isn’t this envisioning a car with no passengers who can drive? Agree there needs to be a physical fallback. But fallback to a parallel system running on ROM might be the safer option.
- AlotOfReading 5y agoThe vehicle this article is talking about is already designed this way. Most systems operate entirely read-only after boot and there are independent fallback systems for critical components.
- balabaster 5y agoHaving spent half a decade working in Oil & Gas flow control systems directly, I can confirm that 10 years ago when I left that industry, cyber security was still not even a consideration. Light years behind wasn't an accurate statement - non-existent was more accurate. Admittedly computer systems have come a long way in ten years, but given the attitudes and technical expertise of a lot of the people I worked alongside, I would say there's a reasonable chance the needle hasn't moved very far. They're excruciatingly good at getting oil out of the ground and getting it to market, but they're not going to be winning capture the flag at Defcon or Blackhat any time soon...
- vmception 5y agoI was at a crosswalk and saw a car with the big cameras on top coming Normally I walk and have confidence the human will stop and not want the consequences, or I at least make eye contact with the human driver for reassurance they will stop This time I ran, mumbling “self driving car fuck that”
- forbiddenvoid 5y agoThis is obviously the real biggest issue facing AV companies. Technology will get there; social acceptance is a bigger hurdle. You have to trust that the machine is at least as likely to stop for you as a human, and that will take a long time for everyone.
- vmception 5y agoI had been beyond the "acceptance" idea, before the cars actually were rolled out, because I believed they would they would be better than humans. I was pretty excited about Lidar. I liked the idea that environmental mix up or collision would be autoupdated to other cars so that they would perform better in the condition, crowd fixing edge cases extremely quickly. But pretty much none of that has happened and the current implementation is a total wtf. Many cars with self-driving capability do not use Lidar, I can't tell which ones do, the very prominent Teslas do not, and they've have hit people in obviously avoidable circumstances that have nothing to do with "being too predictable in a human world", just total fuckups, and I've seen videos of what the Tesla cars see compared to what they do, and I'm not satisfied with them. So for most they may have to build trust, for me they have to rebuild trust, because all the companies have pretty much gone the nightmare route making us all cannon fodder.
- datavirtue 5y agoTesla self-deiving reminds me of Elon's personal life. Stay clear of it.
- cj 5y agoEye contact is also a major component of driving a motorcycle safely. When at an intersection, you know another car sees you by looking through their windshield and judging whether the person is distracted or if they're aware of your presence. It would really benefit motorcyclists, pedestrians, and other drivers if there were some mechanism for self-driving cars to visually and outwardly acknowledge your presence. How often do you wave or signal other drivers with your hands when you both arrive at a stop sign at the same time? What's the replacement for this in a world where half of cars don't have a driver?
- fn1 5y agoI wonder if many of the problems with automatic driving could be solved using platooning (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpuwG4A56r0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpuwG4A56r0, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Re__KRr4NU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Re__KRr4NU). There could be dedicated lanes assigned to the autonomous cars and platooning-protocols that ensure that the cars use their automatic capabilities only on relatively safe highways, only queued between other autonomic vehicles. Should be a more predictable environment and thereby safer
- numpad0 5y agoLooks like the point of the change is that all-passenger hardware configuration is now allowed, just like there is no reason you can't make a tablet PC with no keyboard. Slightly different from "self driving cars are now allowed on the road".
- _trampeltier 5y agoAnd how to drive in exotic places or after a disaster?
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoI would go further - if the vehicle is autonomous, it should be illegal for it to have a steering wheel. The idea that you can make a deadly self-driving car, and then jail the driver because he could not react in 0.2 seconds when your car suddenly swerved is the greatest handover of money and power to corporations since the times of slavery. So make the choice clear - either tha car has controls, or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, there will be no temptation to blame the passenger
- young_unixer 5y agoThe driver should know the capabilities of the car. If he doesn't, then he shouldn't drive it. If he isn't 100% sure that autonomous driving system will work as expected, then he should never enable that system.
- cinntaile 5y agoAccording to your criterium that means never. There is no way to be 100% sure how an autonomous driving system will work as expected.
- young_unixer 5y agoYes.
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoHow does the driver know reliability of closed-source, ai based autonomous system is the manufacturer himself doesn't?
- young_unixer 5y agoThey don't, so they shouldn't use it.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
- lmilcin 5y agoSend them to Poland and require to pass Polish driving license exam.
- throw7 5y agoYou always want a physical failsafe control (i.e. big red button for emergency stop)... it's not clear if nhtsa requires that or not. The practicality of manually driving is not going away. Just this week my neighbor was driving up and down his driveway to transport some heavy packages received.
- juancn 5y agoIt should open up the possibility of facing backwards, assuming you don't have motion sickness, it's a much safer position to be in to dissipate energy in case of a crash.
- biophysboy 5y agoIs this because the seat would distribute the force?
- notyourday 5y ago... And with that women said "eff that!" nailing the coffin of the FAV
- renewiltord 5y agoDo women specifically want steering wheels or something? I’m not sure I understand.
- notyourday 5y agoWomen specifically do not want to be in cars which they cannot even theoretically control.
- renewiltord 5y agoIs this a thing somewhere or am I in a bubble? I know lots of women and no one has articulated this fear about a self-driving car.
- notyourday 5y agoYes, you are in a bubble. The same kind of a bubble where HN geeks do not understand why Air tags are a perfect stalker device.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Women specifically do not want to be in cars which they cannot even theoretically control. I suspect women have a greater relative comfort with automated vehicles versus those controlled by a stranger than men, though I’m not aware of any solid data for that (certainly haven't seen any for your claim, either.)
- jedberg 5y agoI think a lot of people are misreading this. Right now one of the rules to pass a crash test is that there is a steering wheel. This didn't used to be controversial, but now it is. The rules were written in the 70s and just assumed there would always be a drivers seat. The only thing here is that the government rewrote the rules to no longer assume those things. It's not saying those things aren't necessary, just not required. If the car can meet all the safety standards without it, then that's fine. It would be like saying today that you can't have a computer without an on/off switch because in the 70s every computer had a physical switch.
- christophilus 5y ago> It would be like saying today that you can't have a computer without an on/off switch because in the 70s every computer had a physical switch. As aside, that’d be great.
- jedberg 5y agoAs soon as I typed that I knew someone would reply with this. :). I agree it would be nice and I sometimes miss physical switches, but imagine how clunky a Raspberry Pi would be with a physical switch. And besides, I almost never used the switch on the computer anyway. I was always told to put it into a power strip and use that, because it was a lot cheaper to replace the power strip than the broken power switch on the PC!
- cameronh90 5y agoI recently disconnected the capacitive power button on my desktop thanks to my stupid cat repeatedly turning off my computer. Instead, I've turned on the feature in the BIOS to boot up when power is applied. Now, to turn on my desktop, I just flip the power switch on the back. Feels satisfyingly retro.
- flancian 5y agoAs an aside, that sounds like a smart cat, not a stupid one. Perhaps your cat enjoys seeing you react to its shenanigans? :)
- mojomark 5y agoVehicles == Automobiles (in this case). There are other vehicles besides autos (aircraft, boats, ships, tanks). Need to be more specific.
- spacemanmatt 5y agoCyberpunk future, here we come.
- FpUser 5y agoI'm just thinking about legal shitstorm that will happen when completely autonomous vehicle would kill a pedestrian for example.
- dmix 5y agoI could imagine a bus on a fixed route not having controls. This doesn't have to apply universally... There could definitely be a number of use-cases beyond taxis/individual cars. This is why top-tier regulations like this need to be broad. You can refine it at the vehicle category level.
- 0xADADA 5y agodanger is a driverless car turning left onto a bridge that has washed away during a flood, mistaking the map for the territory, it drives us off the bridge because we've eliminated the brakes because we think the car is smarter than the human inside it
- KETpXDDzR 5y agoWithout paywall: https://web.archive.org/web/20220311164526/https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-eliminates-human-controls-requirement-fully-automated-vehicles-2022-03-11/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220311164526/https://www.reute...