It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Self-driving cars with no human behind the wheel — or, for that matter, any steering wheel at all — may soon appear on California’s public roads, under regulations state officials proposed Friday.
The rules represent a delicate balance, trying to ensure the safety of a new technology many people don’t trust while avoiding tough restrictions that could send car companies fleeing to other states.
Until now, California has required all 27 companies testing autonomous cars in the state to have someone in the driver’s seat, ready to take over, when testing on public roads. And those vehicles needed to have steering wheels and brake pedals, even if some self-driving car engineers didn’t consider them necessary.
Both of those requirements would disappear under the new regulations proposed by the California Department of Motor Vehicles.
Instead, automakers would need to certify to the state that their own testing — either on closed tracks or through computer modeling — shows the cars are ready to operate on public roads with no one behind the wheel. Tests with no driver would require an operator monitoring the car, ready to steer via remote control if necessary.
When the self-driving-car revolution firmly takes hold, there will be carnage, according to Wolf Richter of the Wolf Street blog. Not the car-crash kind — though that is a prevalent fear — but on the employment front.
“The magnitude of this problem is breathtaking,” he wrote. Citing government figures, he says that 4.1 million jobs (the stat of the day in our daily Need to Know before-the-bell column) are at risk, including chauffeurs and drivers of trucks, cabs and ride-share vehicles.
originally posted by: MisterSpock
Think of all the technology you have and use. Cellphones, computers, tablets, smart tvs, smart watches, home automation equipment and on and on.
Now, think of which one of those had been reliable 100 percent of the time.
For me the answer is zero, I'm pretty sure thats the same for most people.
When your cell phone locks up and automatically reboots or your internet goes down and you need to hard reset your modem, at least it doesn't kill people.
The first time a car has an issue and plows into a group of people, that company will be sued, probably lose and that will set a precedence.
originally posted by: bluesjr
originally posted by: MisterSpock
Think of all the technology you have and use. Cellphones, computers, tablets, smart tvs, smart watches, home automation equipment and on and on.
Now, think of which one of those had been reliable 100 percent of the time.
For me the answer is zero, I'm pretty sure thats the same for most people.
When your cell phone locks up and automatically reboots or your internet goes down and you need to hard reset your modem, at least it doesn't kill people.
The first time a car has an issue and plows into a group of people, that company will be sued, probably lose and that will set a precedence.
But they only have to be safer than human drivers, who have set the bar pretty low with all of the DUIs, speeding, driving while texting, zipping in and out of lanes, etc. etc. etc.
Edit: And tailgating, how did I forget that. Every single day I see people following someone on the freeway with only a few feet between them. I'm looking forward to no more human drivers.
originally posted by: MisterSpock
a reply to: bluesjr
There certainly may be a net improvement with vehicular deaths. Not the point though. From a business standpoint, this is going to be a huge liability mess.
Not to mention a pr nightmare.
originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: enlightenedservant
What? Government insurance? Lord so full on facism? Come on...does anyone remember liberty. The government protects OUR LIBERTY, not corporations