Nevada Approves Rules For Self-Driving Cars 307
Griller_GT writes with news that Nevada has become the first U.S. state to approve regulations for allowing self-driving cars on its roads.
"Autonomous test vehicles will display a red license plate, Nevada officials said. If and when the technology is approved for public use, the cars will carry a green license plate. ... Nevada said it worked with Google, automobile manufacturers, testing professionals, insurance companies, universities and law enforcement to develop the regulations. Other states also have similar bills that will be voted upon to determine if they, too, can follow suit."
Hopefully the first of many (Score:5, Insightful)
If the rest of the states follow suit in the next few years, we may actually be able to purchase driverless vehicles in our lifetime.
I'm not holding my breath, though.
All it will take is one "think of the children" campaign courtesy of the chronically ignorant to derail this.
Colorblindness? (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought we learned a long time ago not to use only color, especially red and green, to distinguish between signage.
Re:Hopefully the first of many (Score:3, Insightful)
If the rest of the states follow suit in the next few years, we may actually be able to purchase driverless vehicles in our lifetime.
For most trips, you can rent them. You don't even need to pay insurance.
It is called a bus.
I think... (Score:2, Insightful)
... they should put "Student Driver" on the side of the cars. That would ensure that other drivers would be sufficiently wary.
Re:Coloured license plates to ID drivers (Score:5, Insightful)
Different coloured plates may be useful, but I disagree that different rules should apply. I REALLY don't want racecar drivers with new BMWs tearing around the place. That's dangerous, frankly.
I've done a bit of track driving, I don't consider my ability to be much above mediocre for an enthusiast, but I'm better than your average driver. I'm fastidious about sticking to the road rules, just because not everyone has the same level of skill as me.
The roads are for transport, not personal amusement. I want to arrive safely at my destination, please. I'm not too bothered if you're bored because it's slow.
Re:How well do they handle dangerous situations? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Coloured license plates to ID drivers (Score:5, Insightful)
And how often do we check the condition of the car? Do you need to go in monthly to validate the good condition of your tires? What about when the 16 year old son of the race car driver takes the car out? Does he get the +20kph license plate? Or does he have to unscrew it and put his on?
I think the logistics of the whole thing make it a rediculous undertaking for marginal benefit (is there even a benefit?)
Re:Coloured license plates to ID drivers (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that most would agree that a 2012 model BMW driven by a professional racecar driver with 20 years' experience and no traffic infractions could be driven safely 20 KPH faster than a 1982 Peugeot with bald tires driven by a 18 year old who already has two infractions.
Worst of all is the 2012 BMW driven by an 18-year-old.
I'm not so sure that the red plate for autonomous vehicles is entirely a good idea. I'm think it might attract pranksters or worse.
Re:How well do they handle dangerous situations? (Score:2, Insightful)
The previous transmission lacked detail. Automatic and manual refer to the control of the vehicle, not the style of gearbox.
Re:Coloured license plates to ID drivers (Score:5, Insightful)
This is less of an issue where there's not much traffic (parts of the Autobahn, for instance), and you could maybe make it work by having different lanes going different speeds, but there is a point beyond just making you drive slower than you're capable of doing.
actually, (Score:4, Insightful)
One could argue that those who drive motorcycles are the only ones who actually know how to drive. Funny how much a heightened sense of mortality teaches you about how to spot and avoid dangerous situations. Also teaches you a hell of a lot about braking and cornering that's hard to learn when you have all four wheels planted.
Re:One could, and one would be wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hopefully the first of many (Score:5, Insightful)
Faster decisions doesn't necessarily mean better decisions. However, I do think driverless vehicles will be far safer than vehicles piloted by humans. Humans are limited by emotion (fear, anger, impatience) while machines are not.
Rather than having people complain that they're dangerous, I suspect the main complaint will be "but that 100 mile trip took ten minutes longer!"
Re:One could, and one would be wrong (Score:2, Insightful)
""My conclusion? For a given skill level, the auto is always safer because your attention is never distracted at a crucial moment. When you brake, you brake; no remembering the "clutch" or to "change down"."
I guess you've got some of the worst muscle memory and situational awareness ever. I've driven a manual so long that it's literally second-nature to me, everything happens without thinking, it's pure reflex. I don't even bother with the RPM gauge, I know most cars by feel and sound alone, there should be ZERO distraction, it should be an immediate reflex and nothing more.
Also, you tell me how an automated vehicle is going to have the fuzzy logic to know whether a car nearby is actually about to swerve out of control or if the driver is just inattentive and drifting.
Also, there are plenty of manual transmission cars without a clutch mechanism, having it done automatically after you press the gear up/down paddles on the steering wheel/floor ratchet shifter.
Re:One could, and one would be wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Having driven manual cars and motorcycles plenty myself, I can say that I don't find the need to use the clutch or change gears really that distracting at all. Sure, it's something else to do, but something I can do without thinking about it. On top of that, if you just want to stop in a manual and you're more concerned about avoiding an accident? You can still just hit the brake. The car will stop and stall, no big deal. It's a lot better than getting in an accident, and it probably won't do any real damage to your car. Trust me, I've stalled mine plenty when I first learned to drive a stick.
P.S. Good luck shifting a manual into reverse going at 70 MPH on the highway. Most cars, to my knowledge, don't have a synchro on the reverse gear.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How well do they handle dangerous situations? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've seen lots of video of them under ideal scenarios.
Let's get some crash video! :)
Hydroplaning, black ice, big potholes, road debris, silver-hairs stomping on the brakes, et cetera.
Should be entertaining, if disconcerting, to say the least.
I would guess that automatic cars would be even better than humans at any of these conditions:
Hydroplaning, black ice: The car has an excellent sense of traction of each wheel and can take the appropriate action (like reducing power to the slipping wheel(s)) without overreacting (slamming on the brakes because the driver feels the car start to slide), and can take proactive measures when sensors detect hazardous conditions (i.e. drive slower when ice/snow/heavy rain are detected rather than thinking "Hey, it's an SUV, I can drive 75mph through the snow, just like on the commercials.). Depending on what kind of sensors they use, it might be able to see perfectly through heavy fog/rain and in the dark.
Big potholes: I've never hit a pothole big enough to make me feel like I was going to lose control, but since the automatic car always has a firm grip on the wheel and is never distracted by changing radio stations or talking on the phone, I'd say it can do a better job.
Silver-hairs stomping on the brakes? It's the young drivers in sports cars that seem to have that problem -- most older drivers seem to drive slow and brake way before they need to. But this is where the automatic car has the real advantage - not only will it keep a safe following distance, but its sensors will sense the stopping car ahead and calculate the closing rate and will know exactly when it needs to panic stop, and it can do it faster than a human (which for most people means around 250ms just to recognize the threat and then a couple hundred ms to get pressure on the brakes). And the car will sense it regardless of whether or not the brake lights are working on the car ahead of you, and will stop even if it's not a car. If the sensor pod is on top of the car, that extra foot or so of height will help it see over hill crests better than a driver.
I hit a refrigerator on the road one dark night, an automatic car probably would have avoided it completely. I saw a pickup backing up on the road shoulder and was focused on him to see what he was up to and didn't see the refrigerator that had fallen off his truck until it was too late to stop. I started to slow when I saw the truck and hit the brakes as soon as I did see the refrigerator so was only going around 25mph when I hit it. The 'fridge was totaled, but the only damage to my car was a broken front turn signal.
Granted, a heads up display linked to sensors might be able to feed all of the same information to a driver that an automatic car has (threat ahead - object in road! Losing traction in left-front and left-rear wheels! You will have a collision, brake now and turn wheel 10 degrees to the left!) But it's still relying on the driver to react correctly and react quickly.
Re:One could, and one would be wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, you tell me how an automated vehicle is going to have the fuzzy logic to know whether a car nearby is actually about to swerve out of control or if the driver is just inattentive and drifting.
If the automated vehicle has fast enough reaction times, it doesn't really matter; when the swerve starts it can react. Unlike a human driver, the automated car always has its "eyes" on all of its surroundings, and can react almost instantly. Once the drifting/swerving car breaches the safe distance, action is taken to avoid a collision. Will there be some situations where it will be physically impossible to avoid being hit? Conceivably, but most collisions aren't in that class.