backtop


Print 97 comment(s) - last by sorry dog.. on Aug 25 at 12:12 PM

California lawmakers want driverless cars legalized within the state

Few will argue with the fact that one of the only ways to eliminate distracted driving is to completely remove the driver from the equation. This is in part what automated, driverless vehicles -- such as the fleet that Google is operating around the country -- promise. The cars are expected to be safer because distracted drivers will no longer be an issue. Google's driverless fleet has racked up 300,000 accident-free miles.
 
Driverless vehicles can also allow those who were unable to drive themselves to get around without having to seek assistance. Other than making the roads safer, driverless cars also promise to decrease congestion and delays on the nation's roadways by eliminating accidents.
 
California is making moves to get these driverless vehicles on its state roads with one California legislator introducing a bill seeking to clarify that driverless cars are street legal. Google continues to be one of the major driving forces behind driverless vehicles, although there are other companies working in the industry.
 
Google believes that it has the computer science knowledge and financial strength to bring driverless cars to reality for Americans. "It's amazing to me that we (even) let humans drive cars," Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said a few years ago.
 
A lot of the technology needed for driverless vehicles is already available, and some vehicles on the streets today have many of the components needed to make this feat possible. Industry Association Auto Alliance represents Toyota, Ford, GM, BMW, and other major automakers. According to Auto Alliance, its members are individually exploring autonomous vehicle technology, and the association says that great strides have been made in the past decade.
 
Ford and GM, for instance, are working on autonomous braking technology that allows the car to bring itself to a complete stop when radar and other sensors the vehicle use sense an impending accident.
 
While some state legislators in California are trying to get the vehicles legalized for road use within the state, other states such as Nevada already allow driverless cars to operate on its roads.

Source: Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: I drive casue I have to
By Spuke on 8/23/2012 9:55:41 AM , Rating: -1
I applaud you for recognizing that you're a deficient driver!!! I wish more would do the same. Driving is not really a difficult task, it just requires some focus, attention and, IMO, a bit of humility. The humility will make you more polite and courteous which is what we all severely lack as drivers. Automated cars are ok with me but I will not accept a forced purchase of one but I live in an area that's not likely to do so. I can see LA TRY to ban cars (except those owned by illegal immigrants) from the downtown areas unless you have this feature.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/23/2012 10:12:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I applaud you for recognizing that you're a deficient driver!!!


I didn't particularly read that in his post.

I know of racing drivers that hate driving on roads - and who could blame them. Yet, you wouldn't call them deficient drivers!

Anyway - personally I love driving - nothing better than finding some nice twisties and nailing a few apexes - but would also love to be able to hit an autopilot when in a traffic jam or when tired.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/23/2012 10:12:48 AM , Rating: 2
*his -> his/her


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Spuke on 8/23/2012 1:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I didn't particularly read that in his post. I know of racing drivers that hate driving on roads - and who could blame them. Yet, you wouldn't call them deficient drivers!
I did and that wasn't a general statement, it was directed solely at him.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/23/2012 12:08:51 PM , Rating: 1
Congratulations - you've managed to completely contradict yourself in one post.

That is some going, even for you!

;-)


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 12:15:12 PM , Rating: 2
How do you figure? There's no contradiction here.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/23/2012 12:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
"People generally enjoy doing things they are good at. All these people who are saying they don't "like" driving, are obviously very deficient in the skills needed to be a competent driver."

Followed with agreement that racing drivers will not like driving.

Most racing drivers like racing - not driving on roads - doesn't mean they are bad drivers though does it.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: I drive casue I have to
By ArcsinZ on 8/23/2012 1:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But that doesn't mean you were right.


Ok Sheldon.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 12:58:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People generally enjoy doing things they are good at. All these people who are saying they don't "like" driving, are obviously very deficient in the skills needed to be a competent driver.
So, being a skillful driver helps one enjoy sitting in traffic for a couple hours on a regular basis. I guess I should take some driving lessons... Further, riding a horse down the middle of the interstate might be quite a thrill for some people, but I don't think that's a good basis for making it legal. Just because you like doing something doesn't mean it's the best thing for everyone around you (or even the best thing for you).

Anyway, there may come a point where you will no longer be allowed to "race" or drive on public roads. That doesn't mean you won't be able to drive at all, it just means that you will have to do so in specially designated areas - which is what race car drivers do. And, really, driverless race cars? I'm not even sure what you were trying to say there... You are not a race car driver on a racetrack with other racers, and if you were, that wouldn't be relevant either!


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/12, Rating: -1
RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 1:48:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
even there, I doubt self driving cars would make much of a difference
If I could drink or sleep or work while sitting in traffic for two hours, I would not mind sitting in traffic for two hours. That's huge. Plus, depending on the level of coordination between vehicles, a LOT of traffic problems could actually be alleviated altogether.
quote:
Stupid, terrible analogy. Let's just move on,
Sure it's a bit silly, but I think you're ignoring it because it hits the nail on the head: you think something should be legal because you enjoy it regardless of it's impact on other people.
quote:
Ah I see. So because I enjoy driving, I MUST be some type of thrill seeker or rice racer. Wtf?
My mistake, you enjoy driving slowly in a straight line(?). Anyway, you are again saying that you think something should be legal because you enjoy it. Your reason for enjoying it (driving fast, driving Miss Daisy, etc.) isn't important to the discussion.
quote:
I'm paying taxes and road taxes the same as everyone else, etc...
My taxes go to providing for National parks, but I can't go there and start doing something illegal just because it would be fun. I guess I'm not sure what your point about taxes was. You pay taxes so things that are legal now should always be legal in the future? Also, the name calling: no need for a real rebuttal if you're talking to a "liberal" or a "conservative" or "someone-who-doesn't-agree-with-everything-I-say", right?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 2:24:17 PM , Rating: 2
I think we're off on a bit of a tangent. In case I didn't make it clear: I'm not saying anything about "should" or "good vs. evil". I was speaking from the point of view of a hypothetical future with self driving cars and some of the possible legal ramifications of that future. I am kind of jerk, and I apologize for that :)

Anyway, I don't see "manual driving" becoming illegal anytime soon, especially considering that self driving cars are not truly usable at this point. Honestly, if a car purchased today was still worth keeping on the road by the time something like this happens, I would be surprised. Plus, there would almost certainly be a "phase out" period for manually driven vehicles that would last years if not decades. Your investment in your current vehicle is safe... IMO.
quote:
How am I "impacting" other people by driving?
Even for the 70% or so of people who consider themselves better than average drivers, driving is a dangerous activity, and personal (i.e. other persons) safety would probably be the number one reason why it might be made illegal. Also, I am not getting your reasoning regarding why laws regarding driving should stay the same forever. Things change. Laws need to adapt to the changes.

If you want a more realistic example: would you be able to handle yourself tightly packed on the road with a bunch of self driving cars going 200Mph+? There's probably only a handful of people in the world truly qualified to deal with that situation, but that's exactly the type of thing that could be commonplace on a completely automated roadway. They would literally have to have special "slow lanes" for manual drivers, and at some point that would not be viable in most areas.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By 91TTZ on 8/23/2012 4:16:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, I am not getting your reasoning regarding why laws regarding driving should stay the same forever. Things change. Laws need to adapt to the changes.


It seems like whenever someone proposes a really bad idea that flies in the face of all reality, proponents of that idea always fall back on the argument that "things change" and that other people need to "adapt to the changes". That reasoning seems to assume that your idea of change is inevitable and that that majority who is against that idea needs to get in line with the minority that wants that change.

Watch me apply that idea:

"In the future people will have to pay extra taxes to ensure that I can live in a castle. While people may not like the idea at first, it's the responsible thing to do and everyone needs to pay their fair share. Things change. You just need to learn to adapt to those changes and move on with your life."


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 5:03:04 PM , Rating: 2
So, which part are you disagreeing with: you think self driving cars will not exist, or that laws will not need to change to take them into account?

My previous statements are based on the assumption that the majority will overwhelmingly be interested in self driving cars; not some minority cabal inflicting self driving cars upon the poor minority, and I'm discussing it from that point of view. This, I think, is a more likely possible future than you getting a castle...


RE: I drive casue I have to
By 91TTZ on 8/23/2012 4:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you want a more realistic example: would you be able to handle yourself tightly packed on the road with a bunch of self driving cars going 200Mph+? There's probably only a handful of people in the world truly qualified to deal with that situation, but that's exactly the type of thing that could be commonplace on a completely automated roadway.


The 55 mph speed limit was created in order to conserve fuel, not for safety. Since aerodynamic drag squares with speed, speed quickly becomes the #1 cause of decreased fuel economy for any given vehicle. A vehicle that gets 30 mpg at 55 mph will get about 7 mpg at 160 mph. And you want to go 200 mph? You're talking about vehicles that get about 5 mpg or less. How is that an improved future?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 5:24:49 PM , Rating: 2
The 200mph thing is an example of something we could not do at all, today. That's it. Just like today's cars, a self driving car would most likely be able to travel at varying levels of speed as appropriate. It does seem likely that most of the time that speed would probably be closer to 55 rather than 200.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By 91TTZ on 8/23/2012 4:26:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sure it's a bit silly, but I think you're ignoring it because it hits the nail on the head: you think something should be legal because you enjoy it regardless of it's impact on other people.


I enjoy eating steaks. Eating red meat has been proven to cause heart disease. Heart surgery costs a lot of money, most of which is paid by the member's health insurance, which then passes that cost on to the other subscribers.

Since one person's personal pleasure can lead to others paying more in health premiums, is that ground for making it illegal to consume red meat?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 4:38:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since one person's personal pleasure can lead to others paying more in health premiums, is that ground for making it illegal to consume red meat?
Actually, increased group health insurance costs is the penalty for having a bunch of over-eaters in your group health plan.

To make your analogy really work, though, we'd have to first assume everyone was under government health care. At that point, yes, eating steak might become illegal. However, IMO, that's an argument against gov. health care, not steak eating.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By kattanna on 8/23/2012 11:33:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyway - personally I love driving - nothing better than finding some nice twisties and nailing a few apexes - but would also love to be able to hit an autopilot when in a traffic jam or when tired.


same.

put me and my durango out on a mtn road.. and its a lot of fun. the wife always jokes thats its not a sports car.. but I say it is..at least in my hands HAHAHA

sitting in traffic on the 101 during rush hour..um no.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Manch on 8/23/2012 11:51:27 AM , Rating: 2
I'm itching to drive down to Germany right now. Just waiting on two more parts for my car so I can have a little bit more fun when I get there. I love driving but Norway sucks if you do. Top speed on the highways is 90km, and thats if the @$$h0les in front of you aren't driving 10 under. In the city, it's usually 50/60km. I wouldnt mind having a truck with autopilot for long trips that I can tow my car on. Has to be more comfortable than flying coach. The damn airlines are removing leg room so they can cram you in and charge you for teh "extra" inch.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Ammohunt on 8/23/2012 9:06:45 PM , Rating: 2
I have driven from Kiel Germany to Lucerne Switzerland and its stau after stau around the big cities. The only place i got to open up the Audi i rented was on the way back to Frankfurt coming from Neuschwanstein on the A7 220Kph! in a Turbo Diesel no less.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By jeffkro on 8/24/2012 2:40:28 AM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah well I once spent a couple of hours in a German airport


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Ammohunt on 8/24/2012 7:41:25 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah? I spent 6 hours in Istanbul (Not Constantinople..nobodies business but the turks)international airport


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Schrag4 on 8/23/2012 1:21:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know of racing drivers that hate driving on roads - and who could blame them. Yet, you wouldn't call them deficient drivers!


I wouldn't necessarily call "racing drivers" deficient drivers, but I don't think they're necessarily better at driving, either. Can they drive in circles at high speed better than I can? You bet. Do they know when to yield? How to park? How closely to follow other vehicles? Their racing exprience has nothing to do any of those things, in fact it would work against them in some cases (you probably should leave more than 6 inches between your front bumper and the next guy's back bumper).

About the OP's comment - maybe he or she doesn't like sitting in traffic. But if just normal driving among other drivers is what he/she doesn't like, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest he/she, my mother, and my mother-in-law hate it for the same reason - it scares them because they (mother and in-law) are not particularly good at it. Wouldn't mind some clarification from the OP though.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Rukkian on 8/23/2012 3:56:38 PM , Rating: 2
Just because somebody does not like the mundane parts of driving (I have a 60 Mile commute on a long, flat, straight boring interstate). I could almost do it in my sleep at this point. While it will not last forever (job is temporary), it is still boring. For commuting to work and back, I would love to sit back and either sleep, watch movies, play video games, etc.

For other times, I actually enjoy driving. There are different situations, and generalizing about somebody's skill is not a great way to start a discussion.

I would love to see some automated cars come out, both for me, and to hopefully remove some of the other idiots on the road that like to do anything but drive (read the newspaper, put on make up, txt, etc). I do not see anybody even trying to make manual driving illegal in my lifetime at least, and any automated car would have to have a self driving feature (ala demolition man, irobot).


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 4:05:19 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
For commuting to work and back, I would love to sit back and either sleep, watch movies, play video games, etc.


That's what public transportation is for. Sleeping in your vehicle is reckless, plain and simple. Regardless if it's driving itself or not, it cannot possibly be 100% reliable or able to handle every situation that could come up.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Rukkian on 8/23/2012 4:35:53 PM , Rating: 2
If there was public transporation (other than cabs) I would use it.

While the techology is not there at the moment, in my mind within 10 years computers will be able to handle pretty much any situation better than most drivers.

While some people never loose focus, never take their eyes off the wheel, never get tired at the end of the day, I think that they are the exception as opposed to the rule. There are way too many idiots out there. Just takes some great minds working on a big budget (Which google has both of) and I think it can be figured out.

I respect everybody's right to safely operation their car the way they see fit, and would not want it legislated that you have to use a self drive car, the potential for benefits to everybody is out there.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/23/2012 6:55:42 PM , Rating: 2
Yes... 'cos public transport will take you door to door when you want.

Seriously man. Your like a Neanderthal in this this story/thread.

Reclaimer like car. Reclaimer no like people who not like car.

You are all about free choice and options - well, there are a lot of people here would like the option of an autopilot that they can choose to use for the more mundane parts of driving - or because they flat out don't like driving or could better use the time.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 8:52:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are all about free choice and options - well, there are a lot of people here would like the option of an autopilot that they can choose to use for the more mundane parts of driving - or because they flat out don't like driving or could better use the time.


If that's all they wanted, I wouldn't mind. But look a little closer at what people are actually saying.

If you want a self driving car, fine. But here are my terms.

1. I will not pay ANY extra fees or penalties or taxes for choosing to drive my own vehicle.

2. I will not be forced into "special" areas or have my freedom of movement limited based on vehicle choice.

I could care less what you people want to do. Just drop all this nonsense about safety and how I should no longer be able to drive my own vehicle, or somehow be marginalized in some way.

YOUR side is politicizing this, not me.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Amiga500 on 8/24/2012 12:14:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If that's all they wanted, I wouldn't mind. But look a little closer at what people are actually saying.


The sub-heading of the article:
"California lawmakers want driverless cars legalized within the state"

quote:
YOUR side is politicizing this, not me.

Lawmakers are politicians - therefore the issue has to be politicized to make it legal.

Unless you are advocating a change to the US constitution where the President be allowed to change any law as he/she sees fit?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By tng on 8/23/2012 10:14:44 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I can see LA TRY to ban cars (except those owned by illegal immigrants)
Yeah, what is with that? I noticed that in the Inland Empire and greater LA area that there are more cars with expired tags (sometimes over 3 years expired) than anyplace that I have seen, most driven by probably illegals. Up here they don't let you even go a month into the new year without pulling you over for that.

quote:
"It's amazing to me that we (even) let humans drive cars,"
Maybe I am paranoid, but this attitude makes me uneasy. I can see this getting to the point where they will legislate all cars are automated citing accidents, highway fatalities and the like.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 11:00:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can see this getting to the point where they will legislate all cars are automated citing accidents, highway fatalities and the like.
I'm having trouble seeing why this by itself would be a problem...

With an automated vehicle, you're still in control of what the car ultimately does. You just have a level of abstraction between yourself and the mundane specifics of driving.

There will almost certainly still be places to drive manually as well, it just might not be on public roads.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By 91TTZ on 8/23/2012 4:21:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
With an automated vehicle, you're still in control of what the car ultimately does. You just have a level of abstraction between yourself and the mundane specifics of driving. There will almost certainly still be places to drive manually as well, it just might not be on public roads.


While you're taking away his ability to drive his car, can I take away his ability to play sports? There are numerous other ways to stay in shape and I don't want his irresponsible love for playing sports to affect the health insurance premiums of everyone else. If he breaks his ankle or suffers emotional pain while playing one of his sports then everyone else has to pay for it, raising their rates. I, for one don't want the irresponsible acts of the few to impact the needs of the many, even if that does mean taking away his rights.

PS- I don't want you eating meat, either.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By tayb on 8/23/2012 5:04:37 PM , Rating: 2
I loved that you picked sports to support this argument as sports is something that you cannot do whenever and wherever you like. There are designated areas and places where it would be illegal or impossible to start a game of softball. Likewise, there will be plenty of places for you to vroom vroom in your car but it won't be on a public highways where robots are driving. Robots cannot possibly account for the infinite stupidity of human beings.

Further, you don't have a right to drive, it's a privilege. We restrict that privilege for all sorts of mundane reasons but simultaneously decongesting highways, reducing fuel expenditures, and reducing traffic related injuries and fatalities is an outrageous affront to your personal liberties? Give me a break. You guys are silly.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By sorry dog on 8/25/2012 12:12:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Further, you don't have a right to drive, it's a privilege.


We have that statement beat into us from day one at the DMV, but I really have to call BS on that.

The fact is that vast majority of us would find not being able to drive more than an inconvenience. I would be out of job and I bet that more than 50% of America would be in the same situation if survey was given. I don't doubt that at point in time many many years ago, that wasn't true, however given that my livelyhood and "pursuit of happiness" is at stake, then I would call it a right.
Our lawmaking overlords would rather it be called a privilege, so that you have no ground to stand on if you get caught going 8 over and they want your contribution to state police retirement fund. Bottom line is our society in vast majority of America has been reshaped over the last 50 years to require a car pursue a productive life. Anything less is a severe handicap.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 5:45:37 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not that concerned regarding your opinion of what I eat.

As far as the rest of your rambling: I guess I wouldn't want to be a small business owner that pays for a group health plan and has an employee that's constantly breaking his leg. That would suck. It would also suck for the other employees because their costs would go up. Again, not generally going to be a legal issue. If you do something sufficiently negligent, I think there are provisions in some health care plans to not cover you at all. Beyond that... keep pounding away with the obtuse sports and health analogies.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 11:08:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe I am paranoid, but this attitude makes me uneasy.


I like Google as a company, but yes, frankly I would prefer to not hear statements like that from their CEO. Who is he, or anyone for that matter, to say what we "let" people do?

I hate when people who's goal is to clearly make money, pretend they're trying to save the world. Google is only doing this to increase their profits. Which I have NO problem with. But don't hand me this "people shouldn't drive, I'm saving the world" crap, Eric.

quote:
I can see this getting to the point where they will legislate all cars are automated citing accidents, highway fatalities and the like.


Exactly, which is why I don't support self-driving cars. They represent the beginning of the end for car enthusiasts and people who enjoy driving. The car is one of the last bastions of freedom in this country, and even that's being eroded.

And all these pussies who say they don't like driving or whatever...man I REALLY don't understand that. Is there some sort of Testosterone shortage in the last two generations or what?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 12:35:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I hate when people who's goal is to clearly make money, pretend they're trying to save the world.
Which is why the phrase "actions speak louder than words" came about. In this case, their actions are creating some awesome stuff to advance the state of the art. It's fine with me if they make money at it.
quote:
The car is one of the last bastions of freedom in this country, and even that's being eroded.
I think I can hear a bald Eagle crying... Anyway, how will self driving cars limit your freedom? Is breaking traffic regulations important to you?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/12, Rating: 0
RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 1:16:00 PM , Rating: 2
I thought you were being dramatic when you used the phrase "last bastion of freedom" and I was just keeping the drama high :) You have to admit that is a little over the top dramatic... Sorry if I offended your sense of patriotism or something.

Real question, though, and not being snarky: how would that really affect your freedom? The only thing I can come up with is that it would be harder to break traffic laws and generally engage in activities that endanger people around you. You'd still retain complete freedom of movement, and you'd almost certainly still be able to drive manually in designated areas.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Spuke on 8/23/2012 2:24:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Real question, though, and not being snarky: how would that really affect your freedom?
How would that affect my freedom? You really have to ask that? Well, I wouldn't be able to get into MY car that I paid for and drive it wherever I want, however I want (within the law, of course). Like I said earlier, I don't mind self-driving cars, might even own one but NOT at the expense of losing my freedom to DRIVE MY CAR! I'll even go out on a limb and say I wouldn't necessarily care if certain portions of freeways were auto only (maybe high death rate areas or high congestion areas). BUT like Rec77, I don't want this being used to erode personal liberties I had previously.

PS - Personally I think you're just being a troll and trying to get Rec's dandruff up so this will be the only time I'll address you.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 4:29:03 PM , Rating: 2
You called me a troll, but then agreed that the only freedom you'd lose is the freedom to drive... I get it that driving is an enjoyable activity for many people. HOWEVER, my point was that driving a vehicle is also a dangerous activity that, in the future, may not be necessary at all for any reason other than "I like it". I'm not saying it SHOULD be outlawed, I'm saying that if it is the only real loss would be the driving itself, not the things that driving lets you do. In other words, you would be losing something dangerous to others that you enjoy doing, not something necessary or essential for your personal freedom (at least not anything I can think of).

As an aside:
"Wherever" restrictions are a separate issue, from self driving vehicles. There's no inherent reason for self driving cars to be more restrictive in where they can go than manually driven vehicles. I agree that travel restrictions would be VERY bad. Restricting movement is something that governments seem inclined to attempt every so often, and an attempt to do so may happen with self driving cars. However, this could and has happened with current transportation modes, too: look up travel restrictions in Russia during most of the Cold War or air travel in the US, NOW. I would say that is something we'll have to fight against if it starts happening, but not really an argument against self driving cars.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 4:34:15 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
HOWEVER, my point was that driving a vehicle is also a dangerous activity tha


LOL there we go. Right back to your standby nanny state crutch argument.

Shall I list all the "dangerous" activities we do every day, which are perfectly legal?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 5:32:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Shall I list all the "dangerous" activities we do every day, which are perfectly legal?
You're not the guy that tests bullet proof vests are you? :)

Seriously, though, there's probably nothing else you do on a given day that has even a small chance of killing someone other than driving a car. If I'm wrong though, I'd be interested in hearing your list! Sounds awesome!


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Spuke on 8/23/2012 5:54:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seriously, though, there's probably nothing else you do on a given day that has even a small chance of killing someone other than driving a car.
There's nothing else YOU do on a given day that has even a small chance of killing someone other than driving a car. LOL! Fixed that for you.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/24/2012 10:17:55 AM , Rating: 2
It's true!


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Reclaimer77 on 8/23/2012 8:47:46 PM , Rating: 1
Nafhan did you know more deaths occur from high school sports than gun shootings per year in the US?

By your logic, kids should stop playing sports. It's just too dangerous! What right does your kid have to potentially kill my kid from a bad tackle? What right does a coach have to push my kid into a fatal heat stroke?

I think we should start phasing out all athletic activities. Sorry kids, Nafhan Logic dictates that just because you "like" something, doesn't give you the right to do it.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/24/2012 10:15:43 AM , Rating: 2
Not really a great analogy. The cause of a death due to heatstroke, for instance, is probably not due to negligence on the part of another person. If there is reason to believe that it is, then it should probably be looked into, though.
quote:
Nafhan Logic dictates that just because you "like" something, doesn't give you the right to do it.
Yep. I generally take consideration beyond whether or not I "like it" in my decision making process. You got me.

As far as actual "rights" go... I don't consider either playing high school sports or driving to be an inalienable right or an essential pillar of society and culture. They're nice things that we like, and that's it.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By Spuke on 8/23/2012 5:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You called me a troll, but then agreed that the only freedom you'd lose is the freedom to drive
Just because I think you're a troll doesn't mean a disagree with EVERYTHING you said. :) Ok, dangerous is not enough to outlaw something or restrict its usage. Like Rec said, there are a butt ton of things we do daily that are dangerous yet perfectly acceptable nevermind legal. And, yes, "I like it" is enough for me and many other people. We don't live in a totalitarian state and that whole "pursuit of happiness" thing kind of implies "I like it", don't you think?


RE: I drive casue I have to
By tng on 8/23/2012 1:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyway, how will self driving cars limit your freedom? Is breaking traffic regulations important to you?
Is that the only thing you can think of, speeding or running a stop sign?

I have to agree with RC77 on this, it makes me uneasy because it is just an incremental step into control of our lives in general. An self driving vehicle would have to be registered everytime it went onto a road, leading to what amounts to being able to track you every where you go.

Not that I have anything to hide, but I would take offense at someone being able to do that...


RE: I drive casue I have to
By nafhan on 8/23/2012 1:59:29 PM , Rating: 2
If you carry a cell phone with you or have OnStar (or similar tech), this is already happening. Further, with license plate scanning cameras getting more common, unless some legislation comes along and kills them SOON, you will not even need to get a new car for the feds to track everywhere your current car goes.

Basically, I'm not saying your concerns about privacy and "freedom" are invalid (they are very valid and concerning!). I'm saying those concerns are not specific to self driving cars.


RE: I drive casue I have to
By 91TTZ on 8/23/2012 4:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote: "It's amazing to me that we (even) let humans drive cars," Maybe I am paranoid, but this attitude makes me uneasy. I can see this getting to the point where they will legislate all cars are automated citing accidents, highway fatalities and the like.


What he means is:

"It's amazing to me that we (even) let humans drive cars, as opposed to making them pay Google a fee for our Driving As A Service product."

It's a great way to enslave people by legislating that they use a company's proprietary product.


"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki