Google, Ford, Volvo, Lyft and Uber Join Coalition To Further Self-Driving Cars (reuters.com) 103
Google, Ford, Volvo, Uber, and Lyft are forming a coalition to help speed self-driving cars to the market. Until now, these five companies have all been working on their own driverless car initiatives. According to a statement, the new effort, dubbed the Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets, "will work with lawmakers, regulators and the public to realize the safety and societal benefits of self-driving vehicles." David Strickland, a former top official of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, is coalition's counsel and spokesman.
Kick Uber Out (Score:1)
Because Uber ... Ick.
Re:Kick Uber Out (Score:5, Insightful)
will work with lawmakers, regulators and the public to realize the safety and societal benefits of self-driving vehicles." David Strickland, a former top official of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, is coalition's counsel and spokesman.
In other words, these major corporations have formed a special interest (super?) PAC to lobby congress and the regulators, led by a former regulator from one of the groups they'll be lobbying.
Yay?
Re:Kick Uber Out (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, these major corporations have formed a special interest (super?) PAC to lobby congress and the regulators
Yes, and that is a good thing. Legislators and regulators should receive input from people and organizations that actually understand the issues. Their interests in promoting this technology are pretty well aligned with the public interest, so I don't see any major problem here.
Re: (Score:1)
So you'll be okay with the locked down black box system which will heavily favor the members of this group? This group will be the auto industry in the US once the tech is done because the regs will say it must use the tech that consortium controls.
Re: (Score:3)
> Yes, and that is a good thing.
Maybe. Someone telling lawmakers about the needs for uniform, computer (and human) readable road signage, consistent traffic signals (what the hell does a blinking red left arrow mean? And does it mean the same thing in Michigan as in British Columbia?) and similar issues is almost certainly a good thing.
But if these folks devote their efforts to self serving legislation to limit competition or to sacrifice safety for profits, then it's not such a good thing.
Time will te
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Kick Uber Out (Score:4, Informative)
> There's very little confusing road signage in the US; if you know it in one place, you know it everywhere.
Sadly, that turns out not to be quite true. There's a code. But not everyone complies with it. And when it changes many traffic control devices aren't redone to code until they need to be upgraded for some reason. Moreover, it's common practice to modify the normal rules with signs. I'm far from sure that's going to work with autonomous vehicles unless there are rules about sign size, placement, wordage, etc.
When I hit Google to make sure I wasn't dead wrong, I found that there used to be, and maybe still is, at least one place in California where a blinking red left turn arrow meant that -- if you can believe this -- a train is approaching the grade level crossing on the street you are contemplating turning into.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm far from sure that's going to work with autonomous vehicles unless there are rules about sign size, placement, wordage, etc.
Why not slap some universal, digitally readable code onto or under existing signs?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Willing to pay up in cases of death/injury? others (Score:2, Insightful)
Willing to pay up in cases of death / injury?
Who will do the jail / prison time for criminal cases of car accidents?
Willing to be open to FAA like code audits / tests?
What about tickets both ones that go to the car (owner) and ones that go to the driver?
DUI issues can you get a DUI just for being in a auto drive car in auto mode?
Can have a drop out to manual mode just before an accident to get out of having any liability?
Can they force to have dealer only service?
Can they force updates on you and make you p
Re:Willing to pay up in cases of death/injury? oth (Score:4, Interesting)
Willing to pay up in cases of death / injury?
Assuming that the auto-drive was on and there was no tampering of the system then, it should be payed out the same way as no-fault insurance (a model we should have moved to decades ago).
Who will do the jail / prison time for criminal cases of car accidents?
Again, assuming auto-drive and no tampering, there shouldn't be criminal cases. It was an accident! Exception: If shortcuts were made by the self-driving car software; such as the VW emissions-tempering case.
Willing to be open to FAA like code audits / tests?
I would certainly advocate to force this. How about you?
What about tickets both ones that go to the car (owner) and ones that go to the driver?
There should be few if any traffic tickets while in auto-drive mode as the code is supposed to be designed to follow the law (see above line item). Some police departments are actually terrified of this fact as they will no longer be able to use traffic tickets to help fund their departments.
DUI issues can you get a DUI just for being in a auto drive car in auto mode?
Probably early on as the auto-drive systems cannot be fully relied upon for safety but, this will fade in time as systems become more reliable.
Can have a drop out to manual mode just before an accident to get out of having any liability?
These systems, thus far, keep a log so the police would find out you did this and you can be cited/charged accordingly.
Can they force to have dealer only service?
There are already quite a few laws on the books saying that this is illegal. I don't see that changing.
Can they force updates on you and make you pay data overeager and roaming fees? Where an 1-2GB update can cost as much as a new car?
This is probably the messiest issue you've brought up. FCC rules on wireless and wireless charges are crap to non-existent. If I were you, this is what I'd really watch for.
Re: (Score:2)
Was asking Can they have the cars drop down to manual mode on there own just before an accident so they get out of having any liability?
Can they force to have dealer only service under the way of the system will only work in limp mode or not at all if the drm system sees non dealer work has been done?
Willing to pay up in cases of death / injury right away of have the victims left holding the bag with bills racking up as they take a very time of work it though the court system or try to stick it on some sub
Re: (Score:2)
Was asking Can they have the cars drop down to manual mode on there own just before an accident so they get out of having any liability?
Since no-fault insurance doesn't have liability (and this is what the Nevada and California starting frameworks are going towards), there would be no reason to. The car manufacturer would not be liable unless there was proof that they took shortcuts on safety so suddenly making the driver responsible opens them up to more liability than they already have as that would cause an investigation into "shortcuts" on their part. Claims would be paid based on the injured party's insurance unless there was suspicion
Re: (Score:2)
What about a pedestrian that does not have auto insurance? or is not in a car at the time so they are not covered.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, auto insurance does cover you if you're the pedestrian in a vehicle on person accident, just has homeowner's or renter's insurance covers the items in your car in case of accident or theft. I can't explain the logic, but, that's the way they do it. For the pedestrian that does not have insurance that would cover them would be one of those edge cases that would need to be answered. I think most countries that have full no-fault insurance, the government picks up the tab if no other insurance is
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming that the auto-drive was on and there was no tampering of the system then, it should be payed out the same way as no-fault insurance (a model we should have moved to decades ago).
Just wanted to point out how no fault works as it is commonly misunderstood. No fault coverage, more commonly called something like personal injury protection (PIP), is a bucket of insurance that covers the policy holder and members of their household. This coverage is usually a small amount of money like $20k. It pays for the first $20k in medical bills and work loss resulting from an accident for the policy holder. In no way does no fault or PIP absolve a party to an accident from liability. If a person i
Re: (Score:3)
Are you suggesting this is a bad thing? Sure, there's money involved in it for them, but personally I hate driving in the morning commute. I'd like it if I could rest or eat breakfast on the way instead of having to contend with my fellow maniac drivers in the morning. My cousin, who has epilepsy, can benefit from more independence. If it takes a superpac to make this happen, to overcome the "omg skynet, think of the children!" crowd, then so be it.
Re: (Score:2)
It is called a cartel.
No one else is supposed to play if they are not in the club.
And they will buy the political elite to do it.
Cartel socialism.
UBER with no drivers? Sound like a crazy business! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:UBER with no drivers? Sound like a crazy busine (Score:4, Interesting)
This tech could put millions out of work.
The purpose of economic activity is the production of goods and services, not "keeping people busy".
Perhaps the government could pay the unemployed drivers to throw rocks through windows to generate jobs for glaziers.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This happens all the time with new technologies. Cab drivers and truck drivers will join the ranks of buggy-whip manufacturers one day. Same shit, different day.
Re: (Score:1)
1% of the US workforce (1.6 million people) are truck drivers alone. That's a significant number of people need to find other employment in a short time.
On the other hand, some drivers do much more than simply drive the truck. For example milk haulers test the milk before they put it into their truck.
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually, robots (and computer driven cars are robots) will put everyone out of a job. We need to start working on an economy that is not based off the value of human labor as in 50-200 years, the value of human labor will be less than 0.
Re: (Score:2)
That's been Uber's plan since day 1.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm really not sure if they had siri write this for them or if they are related to SCIgen.
I'm going with SCIgen.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the facts. You have to swallow your prize and except the facts.
Quick - someone say how Apple is missing (Score:2)
... and how that makes it CLEAR that Apple is producing a self-driving car!
Re: (Score:2)
Quick - someone say how Apple is missing ... and how that makes it CLEAR that Apple is producing a self-driving car!
Too early. If Apple were to make a car they'd probably license a road-approved system of sensors and AI and focus on selling you a new non-driving experience. That's the point to release a game changer, today's cars are built around driving. The first generation of self-driving cars will probably be built around the same design, just with the technical bits tacked on. Would you really give a hoot about engine and transmission if you were in the back seat of a limo? No. So you wouldn't in a self-driving car
So in 20 years (Score:1)
So in 20 years the average high school graduate will be unable to ..... and this is called advancing civilization.
- read a book, audio books and reader apps
- tie his shoe, self tying shoes
- drive a car, self driving cars
- read a map, gps apps
Re: (Score:1)
Re:So in 20 years (Score:4, Insightful)
There are plenty of skills that were very common 50 years ago and are gone now. How many people here under 30 are competent horse-riders, or know how to pickle fish? All of my father's family (well, the men at least) are competent at hunting, trapping, skinning animals, logging, and basic carpentry. People still hunt, but many fewer would be able to really feed their family that way (as my father fed us).
Lots of skills still exist, but are much less common then they were even 20 years ago. Fewer drivers would be able to change their oil, rotate their tires, or perform other basic maintenance.
Things are moving fast in the world now. There will be skills that are lost with every generation - heck, there's some skills that came and went within a generation (eg. identifying and replacing failed vacuum tubes, VCR repair, making a config.sys that could run Wolf3d) - and skills that are new to each generation. When that cycle stops is when we'll have to start worrying about whether our civilization is advancing.
A Whole New Sport (Score:4, Insightful)
Trolling driverless cars.
Brake checks, lane changes, etc.
These companies have no idea what awaits them on the road.
Re:A Whole New Sport (Score:4, Insightful)
These companies have no idea what awaits them on the road.
I suspect they're planning to sue the insurance companies of the drivers who do that stuff into oblivion. They will have detailed records describing exactly why those acts are illegal.
Re:A Whole New Sport (Score:5, Insightful)
They will have detailed records
Yes. Messing with a driver-less car would be stupid. Smile for the camera, because it will show up on your arrest warrant for reckless driving.
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't illegal if you are a pedestrian or on a bicycle.
Who told you that?
Re: (Score:2)
and where will they store and transmit that data? also the insurance companies / other non cops can't give out tickets.
Re: (Score:2)
Tickets? Who cares about tickets? I'd much rather check my mailbox and find a handful of tickets than a notice that Google or Ford is suing my ass for doing something bad to one of their driverless cars. Tickets would be on the low end of the spectrum for corrective behavior there.
Re: (Score:1)
and where will they store and transmit that data?
Transport companies are willing to pay a lot for accurate information on where their trucks are and to get accurate data to predict when to service them.
There are already systems in use that logs and transmits data to a central server.
I think about 95% of all concerns raised when it comes to driverless cars are about issues that have been solved and been tested in the field for over a decade.
more like 5% (Score:2)
hype overload!
**rain breaks a these driverless cars**
they can't work in rain or where the surroundings are snow covered, for several reasons...but mainly because in rain they can't see
with snow, it doesn't have to be actively snowing... even if the weather is clear and the roads dry, a white-covered surrounding makes it impossible for the car to navi
Re: (Score:2)
> How long do you think before every automated car on the road is submitting data on speeding, illegal lane changes
Let me get this straight. My car is driving itself and it is speeding and making illegal lane changes? Hold on while I call my lawyer -- I smell a class-action suit here.
Only question is who do I sue -- the manufacturer, the dealer, the software mongers ... what the hell ... this is America. We'll sue them all.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would driverless cars get trolled more?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, there's no way that someone doing this would be caught - since all these vehicles will be recording everything that goes on around them for insurance/legal purposes. What could go wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
I think there are plenty of asshole things you could do to a driverless car that isn't illegal.
For instance, just get in front of it and drive 10 mph under the limit. Unless these things have a routine for that, the user will have to go manual to pass.
Ya...just search youtube for Road Rage and see all the fun things that people do.
Just think of Norman. [startrek.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I think there are plenty of asshole things you could do to a driverless car that isn't illegal.
For instance, just get in front of it and drive 10 mph under the limit. Unless these things have a routine for that, the user will have to go manual to pass.
A couple of points:
* Who is going to be more annoyed - the person who is driving 10 below the limit or the person that isn't driving at all?
* Driving 10 below the posted limit can be illegal https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Ya...just search youtube for Road Rage and see all the fun things that people do.
Just think of Norman. [startrek.com]
Just about anything you could do to annoy a driverless car would amount to impeding the normal flow of traffic - which is generally illegal.
http://definitions.uslegal.com... [uslegal.com]
Policy Group - Not Technology Group (Score:5, Interesting)
From the description (I didn't read the article since there wasn't a link), this sounds like an advocacy group to deal with legal matters and public opinion. This has nothing to do with working together to actually develop the technology. We'll likely also get some patent pool groups much like the MPEG licensing group.
Certainly the group they're forming could be expanded to include both patent pool licensing and technology development, but for now, they're just talking advocacy.
Jetpacks and Segways (Score:1, Informative)
We are nowhere close on AI, ergo we are nowhere close on self-driving cars. Can't even get Siri or chatbots to answer questions in any way that represents an ability to make a decision. Hell, even Deep Blue had to be fed the Jeopardy questions via text because it could not parse natural language.
The idea that this all solved for something with a 180 horsepower engine is downright silly.
Look closely at all the reports, these are all really, really constrained experiments with gaping holes (drivers taking ove
Re: (Score:3)
The idea that this all solved for something with a 180 horsepower engine is downright silly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
http://www.cat.com/en_US/suppo... [cat.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Why would I order it? I helped write it.
If you have a perfect mine site where nothing ever changes topologically, then there might be an extremely limited scope, akin to virtual train track operation.
Want to talk more about what you don't know?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
we are nowhere close on self-driving cars.
Tesla Autopilot is already installed in ten of thousands of cars. My wife has a Tesla, and it "self-drives" for 80% of her commute. Google SDCs have driven millions of miles on public roads, and have a safety record far better than human drivers.
Can't even get Siri or chatbots to answer questions
Natural language processing is a far more difficult problem than navigation and collision avoidance.
KISS (Score:3)
The important thing in all this is to keep it simple. There are numerous special interests that want to push regulators towards their own proprietary and expensive "solutions" to problems that don't exists.
The last 60 years is littered with popular mechanics articles about guide wires in the roads or wireless beacons that need to be installed everywhere to make driverless cars a reality. The one lesson in all of this history should be that if you need specialized infrastructure or special roads to make it a reality then it is a dead end technology. Hopefully regulators don't get swayed into expensive dead end demo proof of concepts on special tracks. Roads need to work for both computer and human drivers. And that means smart cars need to work on dumb roads using the least amount of processing power and least number of sensors.
Re: (Score:2)
Also the cars needs to be able to work in a local NON network mode (there are a lot of dead zones and areas with weak cell coverage)
Re: (Score:2)
And they have to be able to work without totally relying on totally accurate GPS and (up to date) Maps since there will always be lag time between the real world and map updates.
We drive by relatively simple sets of mental rules... Go in this direction and don't hit stuff. Obey signs along the way. If you think you are lost or hitting bad traffic, then consult a map or look for a sign to see if there is a better way. Know when you are near the next turn or destination and when you need to find some parki
Re: (Score:2)
Funny story: roads already have things "embedded" in them that are super easy to see: lines painted with reflective paint. Also reflectors. Typically.
Line-tracking is easy. Hell, detecting the side of the road and other objects is easy. Translating these into commands to drive and steer is trivial. None of these are the problem.
The problem is the details:
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, pretty much none of that should be part of a decision tree. Human drivers don't have time to think like that and they don't.
I recall a friend describing to me his thought process before he hit an animal in the road.... It was BS. I was there, he didn't get past "What the ...." and probably more like "Wh..." People make up all sorts of things after they get into an accident because they run through the scenario over and over again in their minds.
Having fast sensor/processing reaction times is
No Responsibilities (Score:1)
So when a car kills a pedestrian or driver will the Corporation be held non-accountable? The rest of the Corporations do what they want, kill people, and go free. Why not this one??
Re: (Score:2)
No the non driver / renter / passenger. who after a long court case with lot's EULA's / NDA's blocking the court / jury from seeing source code / logs / etc or after taking a deal with the DA as they don't have the funds to fight it out.
Does some hard time and after that they find only jobs they can get are the mc job type after a shout time is like I was better off in lock up and I really need an doctor to look at this. Starts to hunt down the place / coders that fucked there life over just to get back in.
Re: (Score:3)
I cross a crosswalk in downtown Mountain View every day to get to the office, often it has self-driving cars on it. I can tell you with 100% certainty that I would rather myself or someone I love use a crosswalk in front of a self-driving car rather than a human driver. At least 15% of the time you're not sure if the human driver is going to run you down or not, or doesn't yield right of way. 100% of the time self driving cars yield to pedestrians. Penalties for pedestrian death by vehicle are going to go w
Google screwed up (Score:2)
I would miss the Taxi driver (Score:2)
I don't know about you, but I consider the chat with the taxi driver to be part of the taxi experience.
When you are visiting somewhere you have never been, the driver might be able to tell you something interesting about the destination.
At one time I would even have missed a train if the driver had not suggested an alternative destination -- which had meant a shorter ride for him.
Re: (Score:2)
one random drunk, and self-driving chaos ensues (Score:1)
seriously, what do you do with a drunken sailor, weaving in a clunker? show me how robocars will deal with that, without killing all the riders in them? that car's not controlled, not in the network, like a sniper at a Super Bowl
IDGAF so long as I'm not forced to own one (Score:2)