California To Join Nevada With Rules For Autonomous Cars

thecarchik writes "As of now, the only state where self-driving cars are legal on public roads is Nevada, thanks to its vast expanses of open space and lightly traveled byways. California, recognizing that autonomous cars are an inevitable progression of technology, is moving to establish its own rules for driverless vehicles. A bill proposed by California Senator Alex Padilla would set guidelines for the testing and operation of self-driving vehicles within the state. As California is home to Google, Stanford and Caltech, all of which have active autonomous vehicle programs, the state is positioned to be a leader in driverless car development. It stands to reason that self-driving cars will be allowed on California's roads, probably in the near future."

Re:As California is home to...

[BasilBrush]

Clearly you've never travelled. Try Italy or India for example.

Re:so it begins

[perryizgr8]

slippery ice covered roads already are quite covered by the computer in your existing car.

Seems Nevada's driverless car rules

[mysidia]

Are actually rules... that autonomous cars can't be driverless

2 passengers required; the human operator has to be able and ready to override the car; which means the human has to have a license, can't be drunk, etc. And the human operator (rather than the manufacturer) is responsible if there is an accident and the vehicle has fault because of improper decisions/failure.

I guess the restrictions "sound good", but they eliminate some of the selling points for the concept of an autonomous vehicle. Probably without making it safer.

You can't be relaxing, chatting on your cell phone, watching TV, or eating while the car drives you.

Makes more sense to require that driverless cars be safe enough and have enough failsafes and instrumentation that a human operator will not ever be required to override; e.g. by ensuring that the safest reasonable response is always what the autonomous car will execute, and facilitated by multiple redundant highly robust systems.

Such that the greatest remaining danger would be that the human erroneously overrides the computer and makes bad choices.

Re:so it begins

[eln]

An automated vehicle would be able to detect the moose and apply the brakes far faster than any human possibly could. There already are rudimentary collision-avoidance systems in some cars, and they'll only get better over time.

Re:so it begins

[an unsound mind]

Computers are perfectly able to see what is going to be on the road, all you need is more sensors and better shape recognition.

Better than humans, in fact. Humans can't see infrared so well, and it's going to be a heck of a lot more useful in the Canadian wilderness than normal sight. Your concerns are a design problem.