Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

Germany To Require 'Black Box' in Autonomous Cars (reuters.com) 56

Autonomous cars should be able to account for themselves, that's the thinking behind new legislation proposed by German's transport ministry. The country is planning new laws that require self-driving cars to include a black box, Reuters reports, similar to the flight recorder required on aircraft. From the report: The fatal crash of a Tesla Motors Inc Model S car in its Autopilot mode has increased the pressure on industry executives and regulators to ensure that automated driving technology can be deployed safely. Under the proposal from Transport Minister Alexander Dobrindt, drivers will not have to pay attention to traffic or concentrate on steering, but must remain seated at the wheel so they can intervene in the event of an emergency. Manufacturers will also be required to install a black box that records when the autopilot system was active, when the driver drove and when the system requested that the driver take over, according to the proposals. The draft is due to be sent to other ministries for approval this summer, a transport ministry spokesman said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Germany To Require 'Black Box' in Autonomous Cars

Comments Filter:
  • Need to stay on for some time after auto cut out so they can't just stop logging right before an crash

  • Black box (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 18, 2016 @12:41PM (#52534967)

    Here we go with the racist comments again. Why not a white box.

    #BlackBoxesMatter

  • by PvtVoid ( 1252388 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @12:41PM (#52534975)

    All cars should have black boxes.

    • Re:Autonomous cars? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nkwe ( 604125 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @12:59PM (#52535121)

      All cars should have black boxes.

      I think that all if not most new cars do have data recorders (black boxes), the question is: What should these data recorders record, and who should have access to the recordings? There is a wide possible spectrum. I would tend to agree with you if we required storage of the last few minutes of mechanical parameters likely to indicate the cause of a crash and make this data only accessible via a court order. I would tend not to agree with you if the data recorders stored months of mechanical data, computer logs, GPS history of where the car has been, video and audio of the drivers actions and or if this data was routinely uploaded to the cloud with no restrictions on access or monetization.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        If I have read access to all that, I'd gladly opt-in... (I really do want a record for my own personal reasons).

      • Actually, I think the most important question is if the data needs to be sourced independently from the vehicle control logic-- a redundant sensor on the "gas pedal," as an example. I don't get a warm-fuzzy when Tesla says that the user depressed the throttle to 97% without knowing that it is independent.

    • Why? So everyone can be tracked everywhere they go and have no choice in the matter? You do realize that they'll have GPS tracks recorded, too, don't you? Are you eager to have the government up your ass even more than they already are?
      • by NotInHere ( 3654617 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @01:13PM (#52535251)

        The usual way to do black boxes is to just record stuff, not sending it anywhere. If there is an accident, the black box data can be read out and the person causing the accident be found out more easily and effectively. That's a good thing IMO. Even if the black box in your own car is used to convict you, its a good system.

        Now, as we live in 2016, probably the black box will be designed in a way that it transmits the data live to the manufacturer, maybe even with kill switches. That's a bad thing, and I don't like it. Or take tesla's ability to OTA update the car software. this is just dangerous.

        So generally, I agree with black boxes, but do not agree with internet connected black boxes. Cars are not planes, they don't get lost at the bottom of the sea. (I do agree with internet connected black boxes for planes).

        • So generally, I agree with black boxes

          See, here's the problem with 'black boxes' in cars to start with: Some insurance companies are already trying to push something similar in exchange for a discount. However it shouldn't be any of their business where you're driving your car. At present you can say 'no' to these tracking devices. If 'black boxes' became mandated, then insurance companies would push for, and get, access to their contents, and with it a complete record of your whereabouts. We're already tracked online, there's already cameras a

          • by dave420 ( 699308 )

            Not in the EU. The insurance companies have no right to data you do not voluntarily provide them.

        • by dave420 ( 699308 )

          Under EU laws any data in a black box would be protected by every entity handling it, with complaints of abuse or misuse backed up by some pretty tough laws (which are soon to get even tougher, benefiting the consumer). Data can't just be sent anywhere under EU law - there has to be a reason for having it, a reason for sending it to anyone, a reason for processing it, etc. If any one of those steps has an issue, the data subject can cause merry hell.

    • by bozzy ( 992580 )
      Everybody, eeeeeeverybody, everybody eeeeeeeeeverybody should have a black box [youtube.com]! Ow.
  • by drdread66 ( 1063396 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @12:47PM (#52535023)

    WTF? The headline makes it seem like this is a done deal, but the text makes it clear this is legislation proposed by one of the govt ministries.

    An accurate headline would read "German transportation ministry proposed requirement for black boxes in autonomous vehicles."

    SMH.

    • by Eloking ( 877834 )

      WTF? The headline makes it seem like this is a done deal, but the text makes it clear this is legislation proposed by one of the govt ministries.

      An accurate headline would read "German transportation ministry proposed requirement for black boxes in autonomous vehicles."

      SMH.

      *Gasp*

      A misguiding headline on Slashdot?!? Who would have thought!! I'm so surprised and upset right now!!

    • A proper headline would require thoughtfulness. Too much to ask. I guess some think they are clever when coming up with click bait headlines, but they come off as idiots.
    • It is a proposal by Mr. Dobrindt who has a track record in failing and proposing ridiculous laws (even though black boxes would be a good idea, but they are also very common nowadays in modern more expensive cars). Anyway, it will most likely fail.

  • Nothing much to add, frankly ALL cars should have a black box that records telemetry for a rolling 5 minute period and can be examined after a crash.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Is it owned by the car owner? Can government or manufacturer access data without due process? In USA, could this be violation of 4th amendment or could car owner turn off data logging? When can the data be demanded: for speeding, running a stop sign, illegal parking, illegal lane change, violating private property (trespassing), or only fatal crash or what? How to prove or determine if data recorded is CALIBRATED and ACCURATE? Speedometer will give wrong reading if different size tires are used. Will

    • I would like to see a hard ass judge hold some one from the car manufacturer in contempt of court for trying to pull some NDA / EULA bs.

      Even more so in a criminal vehicular homicide case.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by thoromyr ( 673646 )

      If such a device is ever installed on vehicles in the US then, no matter what the rules/laws might be at the time of inception, they will in short order certainly:

      1. require citizens comply with law enforcement request for a data dump
      2. criminalize tampering/disabling logging
      3. be considered infallible by those consulting them
      4. be utilized by insurance companies to obtain discounts

      In the interests of protecting privacy, the interface will be proprietary and secret, thus conveniently preventing owners from

      • 1. require citizens comply with law enforcement request for a data dump

        Replace citizens with manufacturers / renters / owners with chain of custody rules in place. Also add civil courts as well as the defense have there own look.

        2. criminalize tampering/disabling logging

        And must be in an open format / can be read with out needing dealer only tools / software

        3. be considered infallible by those consulting them

        Till you hit sometime like the Volkswagen cover up also in a court case having your own independent

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by dave420 ( 699308 )

      In the EU the subject of the data is in full control. Each entity which collects data must inform the user of what is being collected and precisely why. Collecting something else or using it in a different way can result in prosecution (max. â300,000 Euro fine, will be increased in the updated regulations to 5% global turnover or â20,000,000, whichever is higher). Any third-party using this data (which would have been agreed to by the data subject themselves) also has to abide by these rules.

  • drivers will not have to pay attention to traffic or concentrate on steering,

    and

    but must remain seated at the wheel so they can intervene in the event of an emergency

    How are you supposed to respond to an "emergency event" if you're not paying attention? This makes no sense.

    • Well do to apples eula we are not at fault even when the car does not have an steering wheel. At least you beat the chair

    • Exactly. This is the fundamental failing of these autonomous modes. Once the car screws up and throws its hands up in despair, since the driver isn't paying attention, they lack any of the information necessary to recover from the incident. They have no awareness of the location of vehicles and objects around them, and no time in which to gather that knowledge. Their response will be ill-informed and likely to continue the crash -- and yet the manufacturer absolves itself of responsibility because "We were
      • it does not work that way in airplanes. That is why auto drive cars taking over any time soon is not likely may with trump we can speed up the law making parts.

        But right now in planes when the autopilot fails you have a bit of time to work the issue vs in a car. And the training is lot higher with the gov's having full rights to look into stuff in a crash.

        We do have an issue with mostly Asian pilots in where they don't have as much exp / training with manual flight so they are more likely to mess-up when th

  • I'm not aware of any autonomous car that doesn't do this already.
    • But there is no autonomous car that is required by law to actually record the info and not faked info that's the best for the manufacturer.

      Now, if there is a law, its much easier to fine the manufactuer really big if they try to manipulate the records.

      IMO, the black box should be supplied by another manufacturer independent from the car manufacturer, so that manipulation is totally avoided. But probably that won't happen until the industry "learns" and manipulation cases are appearing.

    • by WoOS ( 28173 )

      Exactly. Because there are no autonomous cars yet. So all of those none do this already.
      No, Tesla is not an autonomous car and Google car is not in series production (nor probably ever will, Google will probably want to sell the technoogy, much less captial costs).

  • They already have it. Everything is logged. That is how they knew of the 2 AP accidents
  • ... German regulations that actually makes sense. This isn't too far of from what these cars have already, it's probably no sweat at all for the manufacturers to add a blackbox on top of the tracking and analysis alread built in.

  • The Tesla crash stories of the last few weeks, even about a product that is explicitly not marketed as anything more than a driver backup system, illustrate that car automation even in its current beta state is so much better than manual driving that car crashes can now be handled like air crashes, so rare that each one can be meticulously analyzed to pick apart how the system failed. A black box recording system will be a big help in this process.

    • car crashes can now be handled like air crashes, so rare that each one can be meticulously analyzed to pick apart how the system failed.

      The fact that only a tiny, tiny fraction of all the cars on the road has this function, and the fact that it is something very new, is definitely helping.

      Now if all cars would have just this autopilot crashes would occur much more frequently - even if still far less than the current rate. Then they're probably becoming so common again, like crashes with regular cars nowadays, that you won't hear about it except in the form of end-of-year statistics, or the occasional really bad one.

  • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Monday July 18, 2016 @08:28PM (#52538311)

    The Tesla cars aren't autonomous. They're a regular car with lane-keep-assist and radar cruise control.

    They can't read street signs or traffic lights, manage intersections, give way, react appropriately to anything that suddenly blocks it's path (like a truck cross the road)

    All they do is keep you in the lane at a safe following distance from the car in front of you and change lanes when you use the indicator.

    If your lane suddenly ends because there are road-works, you crash through the road cones and into the safety barrier they put up.

    There have been zero autonomous vehicle fatalities.

  • The legislation is a proposal from Mr. Dobrindt who is famous for his unsuccessfulness and stupidity. He wanted to introduce road tolls for non Germans, which is of course illegal . Therefore the project ended in disaster. He proposed WiFi in long distance trains, but the real problem is limited track capacity. He is the worst minister for transportation we had and we had quite a few stupid ones. Nowadays he is also responsible for the Internet and telecommunications. That is why we suck there too.

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Working...