Driverless cars.

BigRedBuster said:
My family has a very...interesting...history in aviation.  I'm well aware of that.  I do find flying a plane in a wide open air much different than driving a car or semi in heavy traffic.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. And passenger aircraft autopilots aren't designed for all emergency situations - that's what the pilots are trained for. Of course, the giant difference between airplanes and cars is that a car can always come to a stop in an emergency.

 
They're not ready to be on public roads without a driver on standby. In a few years maybe though. 

I agree that we should regulate the testing and safety standards for autonomous vehicles to ensure basic compliance. We do it for virtually every other aspect on cars (defrost times, flammability standards, impact and airbag standards, backup cameras, emissions...), there is no reason that autonomous transportation shouldn't have it's own regulations. I think you guys would be shocked at just how heavily regulated the interior of a car is for safety, beyound seat belts and airbags. Something none of us ever think about. To know that these vehicles basically have no standards right now is a little baffling to say the least.

That being said, she is a professor at Duke. She isn't in Michigan or California testing these vehicles. I think it's a little reckless and outside the lines to say that these vehicles are  "unquestionably unsafe" and "deeply flawed". 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Haha, I'm familiar with Missy Cummings. If you listen to the interview, she claims the pedestrian can't be blamed for the accident because that person died, which is nonsense, and then she tries to say that they were crossing near a walkway even though there's a sign saying not to cross there. And then goes on to speculate that the county is going to be culpable because that sign probably means the road design isn't safe, which is an enormous leap in logic. And I question her claims that the vision systems are "deeply flawed". Deeply flawed in what way and compared to what? Humans have blind spots too. But she's right that there needs to be standardized tests to license autopilot systems before they should be allowed to drive without human supervision.

Here's an article from Dec looking at the question of how safe is safe enough:

How safe is ‘safe enough’ to put driverless cars on the nation’s roadways?

 
RedDenver said:
Haha, I'm familiar with Missy Cummings. If you listen to the interview, she claims the pedestrian can't be blamed for the accident because that person died, which is nonsense, and then she tries to say that they were crossing near a walkway even though there's a sign saying not to cross there. And then goes on to speculate that the county is going to be culpable because that sign probably means the road design isn't safe, which is an enormous leap in logic. And I question her claims that the vision systems are "deeply flawed". Deeply flawed in what way and compared to what? Humans have blind spots too. But she's right that there needs to be standardized tests to license autopilot systems before they should be allowed to drive without human supervision.

Here's an article from Dec looking at the question of how safe is safe enough:

How safe is ‘safe enough’ to put driverless cars on the nation’s roadways?
Click to expand...


I don't know this person at all.  I put the article out to add to the conversation.

But, let me ask this.  If you are driving down the street and you hit a pedestrian....even if it is not in the cross walk where the pedestrian is supposed to be, are you legally blamed for the accident?  Let's say I'm passing some parked cars and a child runs out and I hit him.....aren't I at fault?

 
BigRedBuster said:
I don't know this person at all.  I put the article out to add to the conversation.

But, let me ask this.  If you are driving down the street and you hit a pedestrian....even if it is not in the cross walk where the pedestrian is supposed to be, are you legally blamed for the accident?  Let's say I'm passing some parked cars and a child runs out and I hit him.....aren't I at fault?
Click to expand...
No. At least not in any state I'm aware of. There's a little gray area here, but basically the driver is only at fault if they could have reasonably avoided the pedestrian.

 
BigRedBuster said:
I don't know this person at all.  I put the article out to add to the conversation.

But, let me ask this.  If you are driving down the street and you hit a pedestrian....even if it is not in the cross walk where the pedestrian is supposed to be, are you legally blamed for the accident?  Let's say I'm passing some parked cars and a child runs out and I hit him.....aren't I at fault?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, and it probably depends on the laws in that jurisdiction. But generally I would think you are assumed at fault until proven otherwise by law enforcement and witnesses.

 
BigRedBuster said:
But, let me ask this.  If you are driving down the street and you hit a pedestrian....even if it is not in the cross walk where the pedestrian is supposed to be, are you legally blamed for the accident?  Let's say I'm passing some parked cars and a child runs out and I hit him.....aren't I at fault?
Click to expand...


In a lot of scenarios, no, you are not legally blamed.

 
I get the whole safety thing but i actually ENJOY driving . I don't want my car to do it for me. Are the supporters on here thinking eventually this is going to be a mandatory  thing? 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top