4 ms·

Though I agree mostly with your sentiments, I'll play devils advocate a bit. Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehic

Though I agree mostly with your sentiments, I'll play devils advocate a bit. Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? The article unfortunately does not say what data is being required to be made public, but it does suggest that it is proprietary information, not specifically all information. Crash information, I believe, is public information anyway. Perhaps not the intimate details of each crash, but the location, speed, etc, for both human and autonomous vehicles is (or should be) publicly available. There are definitely datasets for crash incidents, and there are rules regarding reporting of crashes in autonomous vehicles, which Cruise (I believe) failed to abide by and eventually led to GM shutting it down. If the details were around the methods Tesla is using to assign robotaxis to certain areas and manage charge levels, should that be public knowledge if they have some special proprietary algorithms they feel are valuable?

knowitnone 1y ago
because autonomous vehicles include the driver and the vehicle while human operated vehicles only include the vehicle where the operator is the buyer. If you caused a car crash, that's mostly a you issue (unless it's a car defect), not a vehicle issue. If the autonomous vehicle is in a crash, it's a vehicle issue as well. Simple right?
aaomidi 1y ago
> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? It’s new.
mystified5016 1y ago
> Crash information, I believe, is public information anyway. > Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? That's the entire argument. That's it. Crashes involving citizens or public property on public roads are public information. No exceptions for having a lot more money than the guy your unsupervised car crashed into.
hshdhdhj4444 1y ago
> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? - Do autonomous vehicles go through licensing requirements and need to get a government ID which requires the sharing of a tremendous amount of information with the government? - Can autonomous vehicles be taken to court and be saddled with punishments that can end what’s most valuable to them, their freedom? Autonomous vehicles can and should be treated differently because our current system of incentives, punishments, licensing, information gathering, etc are all designed with humans and human preferences and tendencies in mind.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently than human operated vehicles? Humans have been driving on public roads for over a century. We know how they work. We don’t know how a given self-driving system will work, and are trusting the companies developing them to do the right thing, but to make sure we need to see their books. The alternative is requiring each version of driverless software to take a comprehensive regulatory driving test, which is a bureaucratic nightmare nobody wants.
Zigurd 1y ago
Why should autonomous vehicles be treated differently? For one thing, we don't feel the same about robots killing humans as we do about humans killing humans, which happens about 40,000 times a year in the US on our roads. I don't know why that is but that's how humans think. Now ask me if I would like human piloted accident data to be as transparent as what people are demanding of AV operators.

knowitnone 1y ago

because autonomous vehicles include the driver and the vehicle while human operated vehicles only include the vehicle where the operator is the buyer. If you caused a car crash, that's mostly a you issue (unless it's a car defect), not a vehicle issue. If the autonomous vehicle is in a crash, it's a vehicle issue as well. Simple right?

aaomidi 1y ago

> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? It’s new.

mystified5016 1y ago

> Crash information, I believe, is public information anyway. > Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? That's the entire argument. That's it. Crashes involving citizens or public property on public roads are public information. No exceptions for having a lot more money than the guy your unsupervised car crashed into.

hshdhdhj4444 1y ago

> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently then human operated vehicles? - Do autonomous vehicles go through licensing requirements and need to get a government ID which requires the sharing of a tremendous amount of information with the government? - Can autonomous vehicles be taken to court and be saddled with punishments that can end what’s most valuable to them, their freedom? Autonomous vehicles can and should be treated differently because our current system of incentives, punishments, licensing, information gathering, etc are all designed with humans and human preferences and tendencies in mind.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> Why would autonomous vehicles be treated any differently than human operated vehicles? Humans have been driving on public roads for over a century. We know how they work. We don’t know how a given self-driving system will work, and are trusting the companies developing them to do the right thing, but to make sure we need to see their books. The alternative is requiring each version of driverless software to take a comprehensive regulatory driving test, which is a bureaucratic nightmare nobody wants.

Zigurd 1y ago

Why should autonomous vehicles be treated differently? For one thing, we don't feel the same about robots killing humans as we do about humans killing humans, which happens about 40,000 times a year in the US on our roads. I don't know why that is but that's how humans think. Now ask me if I would like human piloted accident data to be as transparent as what people are demanding of AV operators.