Slashdot Mirror
Google Lobbies Nevada To Allow Self-Driving Cars
b0bby writes "The NY Times reports that Google is quietly lobbying for legislation that would make Nevada the first state in which self-driving cars could be legally operated on public roads. 'The two bills, which have received little attention outside Nevada's capitol, are being introduced less than a year after the giant search engine company acknowledged that it was developing cars that could be safely driven without human intervention.'"
Although, keep an eye on skynet cause it can take over these cars you know....
I would not feel safe with self driving cars on the road...yet.
Google's still a private company, and their word alone that these cars are safe does not a satisfied citizen make. Let these cars be thoroughly tested by both a government entity and a private third party before they be allowed on the road.
Furthermore, we all know that a program that's still being beta tested still has its bugs. Even if the bugs were worked out so that a car "experienced a bug" only once every 100,000 miles, given the number of vehicles presently on the road and how much they are driven every day, that would still be too many "crashes" for society to find acceptable.
In NY, all self-driving cars will have drivers after they have been on the road for a hour or so. They will not necessarily return home.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
I can't wait for Microsoft's Kinectivehicle running Windows Live Turbo Edition. Oh, okay, even they wouldn't put motion controls in the car. Still after the search engine (all... four? ..of them), the music player and store, the phones... I'd really enjoy watching them throw their hat into the ring.
Only one error in 100,000 miles -- I'll take that in a heartbeat over the thoughtless people I drive beside each day. I guarantee the best drivers have more than 1 bug in 100K miles.
Cant help but thinking of this little gem. Arent we a bit backwards today?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locomotive_Act
HTTP/1.1 400
I think all states have a minimum age for (human) drivers, so that should have to apply to computers driving cars too. They would have to show stability and reliablty before being let loose on the roads.
I know that Bruce Schneier has said that human beings tend to overestimate risks when we feel that we are not in control and underestimate risks when we feel that we are in control. That's why people tend to feel more anxious in the passenger seat.
I think it is this innate sensibility that will be the biggest obstacle to self-driven cars, and will remain after the technological problems are solved.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Not so sure. Public pressure is a strong force, and this can come in many small steps. Infact arguably the trend started long ago.
We've got automatic transmissions. Sure, no biggie. Then we've got cruise-control. Sure, it's a tiny step. Then the cruice-control is adaptive, slowing down if the vehicle in front does. Then you add lane-assist, where the car actively warns you if you're leaving the lane. Add automatic-braking for pedestrians. Add automatic parking. Add automatic sideline-stops if the car "thinks" the driver is asleep.
A driverless car is HUGELY more useful than a driven car, so much so that everyone will want one. Or atleast everyone except for a few nostalgics. (the same demographic that today drive cars with no ABS - they exist, but are a fringe)
Automation will bring prices down so much that you hardly have to work to buy what you need. I can find computers in the trash that would be considered Super Computers 20 years ago.
Yes, we've seen that with current car technology. In 1970 an average vehicle cost 20% of average wages. Today it is close to 50%. And yet, in 1970, most vehicles were assembled by hand. Today, most are assembled through automation. Music CDs are infinitely cheaper to produce than cassette tapes, but even after taking into account inflation, they haven't come down in price. While it is true somethings do get cheaper, it tends to do more with supply and demand than cost of production. A business will charge whatever it can on a product, regardless of the cost to manufacture. If there isn't enough of a difference between the selling price and the cost to produce, they will quit producing it.
Automation only reduces production costs, it doesn't impact selling price. Only competition can do that. But notice, even though there are numerous car manufacturers, they all sell in the same price range. Why? Because that is what the market will bear.
Google has plenty of tax dodges. Like the Double Irish, to name one.
They should be paying billions more in taxes then they do by claiming the IP is owned by the company in Ireland.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I saw one on the road around noon yesterday, Velodyne inverted-cone scanner rotating on top. This was on I-280 headed southbound between Palo Alto and Cupertino, about ten miles from Google HQ. It stayed centered in lane, going exactly 70mph. Not clear if it was in autonomous mode or just someone out gathering data. I have a picture, but it's not too good; I just grabbed a Nikon CoolPix and aimed it out the windshield.