Autonomous vehicles OK'ed in California.

[RGClark]

Driverless cars now street legal in California.
The Golden State joins Florida and Nevada in leading the charge for autonomous vehicles.
Published: Sept. 26, 2012 at 12:13 PM By GABRIELLE LEVY, UPI.com
http://www.upi.com/blog/2012/09/26/Driverless-cars-now-street-legal-in-California/3601348675101/


Bob Clark

 

[Artlav]

So, who goes to jail when such a car runs over a suddenly appearing kid?

 

[Quick_Nick]

So, who goes to jail when such a car runs over a suddenly appearing kid?

If everything works right, no one needs to go to jail anyways right? It should likely have to be a situation where a human driver wouldn't have had a chance either.

 

[RGClark]

If everything works right, no one needs to go to jail anyways right? It should likely have to be a situation where a human driver wouldn't have had a chance either.

True but for a human driver you could say it was just an accident. But for a vehicle in effect being driven by a billion dollar company you could still imagine lawsuits being initiated.


Bob Clark

 

[jedidia]

If everything works right, no one needs to go to jail anyways right? It should likely have to be a situation where a human driver wouldn't have had a chance either.

It's seldom that everything always works right, and in case of an accident it would be good if the liabilities are clear. If not, the first few court cases will establish them.

 

[RisingFury]

About damn time.

I bet these cars will drive more safely than humans. Computers don't suffer from road rage or heavy feet. They won't cut corners, run red lights, overtake in a risky manner, drive right behind another car with no safety distance, run from the police,...

Unlike humans, computers do exactly what they're told to do.

 

[Artlav]

Maybe, maybe not.

For something less drastic, what happens in a minor accident?
I assume, by your laws it is also something like the guilty party pays the fine, and their insurance covers the damage.

But the concept of guilty party becomes invalid - the owner/passenger had nothing to do with the accident.
Why should he pay the fine and get his insurance rates increased?

Some sort of a legal solution had to be made.

 

[Codz]

Unlike humans, computers do exactly what they're told to do.

You've obviously never used my computer...

 

[APDAF]

What would happen if someone hacks into the system?

 

[Artlav]

Unlike humans, computers do exactly what they're told to do.

But we still haven't learned how to break into describable steps that which makes us intelligent, or make a compact enough version of all our peripheral "hardware".

Google cars can't tell a pedestrian from a pole - they rely on a centimetre resolution maps to determine that.
They can't detect traffic lights - they rely on maps to know where to look for them.
They can't anticipate human actions, and so to react ahead of time.
They probably won't react too well in an unusual situation.

It's a nice piece of technology, and it works better than a human in controlled environment.
But it's still too primitive to work in unconstrained world without overseeing.

What would happen if someone hacks into the system?

Same thing that would happen now.
If someone have access to your car's computer, he can as well wire a grenade to the ignition key.

 

[Urwumpe]

Also it has to be said that just while we are talking here, this years ELROB challenge is taking place in Germany, which can be summarized as "remote controlled military robots failing in the mud."... only few vehicles are really autonomous, many don't finish the parcours (offroad) and as far as I know, none managed to take pictures of the signs, that had been the goal of the simulated recon mission.

 

[Quick_Nick]

Maybe, maybe not.

For something less drastic, what happens in a minor accident?
I assume, by your laws it is also something like the guilty party pays the fine, and their insurance covers the damage.

But the concept of guilty party becomes invalid - the owner/passenger had nothing to do with the accident.
Why should he pay the fine and get his insurance rates increased?

Some sort of a legal solution had to be made.

Well, until owning an autonomous car doesn't mean having more than enough money to pay for an accident, I don't think there's much worry for now.

And as for needing a map for anything, I don't believe that's still completely true. I'll do some research (but probably have someone beat me to it) and look for instances of autonomous driving 'on-the-fly'. Either way, 1. I imagine it would have maps for most areas. Humans often rely on maps/GPS to figure out how to get places on known routes, and 2. You can always take control of the vehicle when it's unsure how to navigate. At the least, the vehicle could be expected to come to a quick stop while avoiding objects.

Here's an outdated example: http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/advanced-cars/autonomous-vehicles-complete-darpa-urban-challenge
I'll have to find the video showing the car's perception.

 

[Andy44]

So, who goes to jail when such a car runs over a suddenly appearing kid?

Likely the operator of the vehicle will be held responsible, much like the pilot of an aircraft using an autopilot, but in reality it will take a few court cases to establish the details.

If everything works right, no one needs to go to jail anyways right? It should likely have to be a situation where a human driver wouldn't have had a chance either.

Yes, and if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon! There has never been a system in which "everything works right", certainly not in the early days. You can bet there will be accidents with these things, some minor and some hair-raisingly grousome.

Most of us trust jetliners to carry us, even though we have absolutely no control over what happens to us once we step aboard the plane, and with the full knowledge that jetliner crashes usually kill everyone on board. But we know that there are at least two humans up front who are required to pay attention to what the aircraft is doing and trained to deal with problems. We also know that even in busy airspace, the sky is way less crowded than a freeway full of cars going 65 mph and driven by unpredictable and poorly-trained people.

So while I hope these things work fine and look forward to it, it will take some time for them to gain my trust.

 

[Ark]

I can't wait for the day I get to troll the lazy people in automated cars. Adaptive cruise control already stomps the brakes when someone cuts into the programmed buffer zone, I can't imagine how much fun you could have when you figure out all the basic parameters the cars operate on. For example, an automated car will never accelerate and deliberately cut you off on a merge, so you could cut them off constantly and never worry. I could drive next to one and gradually drift closer and make it drift over to the side of the road until it detects the edge of the road and freaks out. I could mount a doppler radar broadcaster and a receiver on my bumper to detect the frequency of the distance-sensing radar, then broadcast contrary waves to make other people's cars panic stop. I could use the wifi car-to-car connectivity to load a virus onto someone else's car that changes the throttle position sensor value the PCM sees to 100% and makes the car wildly accelerate.

I'm a trained technician, I can make stuff like that happen with a few soldered wires and a wirelessly triggered relay. How much fun could be had when you have external access to a car's control systems and can dick around with them? You say it's impossible? Look what just happened to the Siemens control system for Iran's centrifuges. All cars today run the same OBD2 control systems, manufactured by a handful of companies like Bosch or Siemens or ACDelco. Imagine Flame or Stuxnet running wild on the highways, jumping from car to car to wifi-enabled stoplights to other cars.

I can't wait!

 

[Artlav]

Likely the operator of the vehicle will be held responsible, much like the pilot of an aircraft using an autopilot, but in reality it will take a few court cases to establish the details.

What if the "operator" is deadly drunk, and the car is used as a homing horse?
Even better, what if there is no one inside, i.e. the car was ordered to drive home while the owner went to a party?

There would be some interesting court cases for sure.

And as for needing a map for anything, I don't believe that's still completely true.

Last time i checked on Google's cars, they had to do a run with their rangefinder sensor in recording mode several times, to make a centimetre resolution map of the street to be driven autonomously on.
This "map" allows to determine which objects are static scenery, and which are potentially mobile - people and so on.

So, it's a bit more than just GPS and a map.

I could mount a doppler radar broadcaster and a receiver on my bumper to detect the frequency of the distance-sensing radar, then broadcast contrary waves to make other people's cars panic stop.

Weren't Google cars using scanning laser rangefinder as a primary sensor?
Besides, anyone smart enough to dick around like that is often smart enough not to intentionally do any harm.

I could use the wifi car-to-car connectivity to load a virus onto someone else's car that changes the throttle position sensor value the PCM sees to 100% and makes the car wildly accelerate.

Now, WHY would anyone sane design a car control system with network access?
It just reeks of hollywood-level absurdity, like in that movie where hacking traffic lights caused massive and easily preventable messes of bent metal.

You say it's impossible?

I hope the control system design will be done by competent people.
But i can easily imagine someone leaving a remote backdoor, for any good or bad reason like runaway control or government wanting control, and it goes south from here.

I guess, only time will tell.

 

[RisingFury]

I can't wait for the day I get to troll the lazy people in automated cars. Adaptive cruise control already stomps the brakes when someone cuts into the programmed buffer zone, I can't imagine how much fun you could have when you figure out all the basic parameters the cars operate on. For example, an automated car will never accelerate and deliberately cut you off on a merge, so you could cut them off constantly and never worry. I could drive next to one and gradually drift closer and make it drift over to the side of the road until it detects the edge of the road and freaks out. I could mount a doppler radar broadcaster and a receiver on my bumper to detect the frequency of the distance-sensing radar, then broadcast contrary waves to make other people's cars panic stop. I could use the wifi car-to-car connectivity to load a virus onto someone else's car that changes the throttle position sensor value the PCM sees to 100% and makes the car wildly accelerate.

I'm a trained technician, I can make stuff like that happen with a few soldered wires and a wirelessly triggered relay. How much fun could be had when you have external access to a car's control systems and can dick around with them? You say it's impossible? Look what just happened to the Siemens control system for Iran's centrifuges. All cars today run the same OBD2 control systems, manufactured by a handful of companies like Bosch or Siemens or ACDelco. Imagine Flame or Stuxnet running wild on the highways, jumping from car to car to wifi-enabled stoplights to other cars.

I can't wait!

Cool movie, bro, now let's get back to reality.

 

[RGClark]

Volvo sees crash-free car by 2020.
by Wayne Cunningham July 22, 2013 5:11

In the above video, Volvo details some of the technologies it is developing in its quest toward accident-free driving. This video not only lays out Volvo's strategy, but mirrors the work other automakers are doing that will eventually result in autonomous cars.
The video begins with Thomas Broberg, Volvo's senior safety adviser, outlining six technologies that Volvo has deployed or is developing.
Pedestrian detection in darkness
Animal detection
Road edge and barrier detection
Vehicle-to-vehicle communication
Self parking
Adaptive cruise control with steer assist

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-57594979-48/volvo-sees-crash-free-car-by-2020

Bob Clark

 

[Artlav]

Volvo sees crash-free car by 2020.

For every unsinkable ship there is an iceberg in ambush.

 

[Quick_Nick]

For every unsinkable ship there is an iceberg in ambush.

If you had to be my passenger, you would prefer a computer. :lol:

 

[N_Molson]

I hope that police forces will have a "shutdown" remote control device. Imagine that they detect something wrong on the car and want to stop it. Or even better, imagine they suspect it from carrying illegal stuff. Drugs dealers would be happy with such toy bots to make their deliveries. No more problems with the driver giving them off when arrested.