Slashdot Mirror
Google Gets Driverless License For Nevada Roads
Fluffeh writes "On Monday, the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles approved Google's license application to test autonomous vehicles on the state's roads. The state had approved such laws back in February, and has now begun issuing licenses based on those regulations. The state previously outlined that companies that want to test such vehicles will need an insurance bond of $1 million and must provide detailed outlines of where they plan to test it and under what conditions. Further, the car must have two people in it at all times, with one behind the wheel who can take control of the vehicle if needed. The Autonomous Review Committee of the Nevada DMV is supervising the first licensing procedure and has now approved corresponding plates to go with it, complete with a red background and infinity symbol."
TFA fails to mention why two people are required in the test vehicle. I can understand having a "driver" that can take over if something goes wrong, but what is the purpose of the 2nd person?
I wonder who's going to be immortalised as the first person to be killed by a computer-controlled car?
Having seen the way most humans drive, I trust the Google'mobile much more than my bio-brethren.
This signature is false.
Probably some poor mechanic working on said car, When owner calls it home whilst still up on the Car Jack.
"Beta" has no direct effect on legal liability. It mainly exists to manage customer expectations about feature stability and functionality.
And, anyway, its not something they do that much anymore.
Plus, posting a $1 million bond liability bond is a strange thing to do to "avoid liability".
I think there are lots of really obvious ways you could "gain something" from driverless vehicle technology that don't involve privacy violations.
Starting with licensing driverless vehicle technology to vehicle manufacturers.
Google Goggles isn't a device at all, its software that's available for various devices.
Uh, yeah, it advertises itself as an image-based version of search. Next thing you are going to be surprised that the Google Search app doesn't do the search locally on your device, but sends the search terms to Google's servers.
"living world" and "meatspace" are the same thing.
And it would give them the same amount of information as with the facial recognition technology without the patent, which is a red herring.
So? Aside from revealing your personal biases, what value do you think your unsubstantiated guess in this area provides?
Because:
(1) Google's "non-working Beta software" often works better than software from other companies that purports to be ready for general release,
(2) For most software purposes on the internet, there isn't the kind of immediate public safety concern that justifies regulation of what vehicles are allowed on public roadways.
Insofar as thee have been actual credible accusations of privacy violations at Google, governments -- both in the EU and the US -- have stepped in.
If you have information on cases where that has not occurred, you should provide specifics, rather than vague handwringing.
Though, preferably, in an appropriate place -- even if you had a point, without some nexus beyond a connection to the same company, it would still be off-topic in a thread on Google's driverless car technology.
As a pretty firm believer in the principal of legality as opposed to the rule of lynch mobs, I'd like to see some credible evidence that the "CEO's and higher level people" actually committed offenses for which jailing is the punishment prescribed by law before accepting that they ought to be put in jail.
Google Gets Driverless License For Nevada Roads
1. It is not driverless as there has to be a driver behind the wheel at all times.
2. From the term "driverless license" it seems that they are comparing it to a "driver's license" which is not true. What is actually being issued is an "autonomous testing business license and license plates:.
It is a license to test autonomous vehicle under very strict guidelines.
A much better headline would have been "Google gets license to test autonomous vehicles on Nevada roads"; less flashy but much more accurate
"Is Google putting a gun to my head? No... I can choose not to use the internet."
better yet, you can use the internet but choose not to use any of googles services
there are lots of search engines....google it if you dont belive me.
Human: "Holy crap! Computer! You're driving in the oncoming lane!" ...
Computer:
Human: "Stop! Abort! Cancel! Computer -- release your controls!"
Computer: "I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that. I'm detecting that you have an elevated heart rate, which in humans is consistent with high levels of stress. Humans under stress tend to make poor decisions. Many humans have reduced their stress levels by listening to Brahms' music. May I suggest you purchase one of:
J Brahms - Best Of Brahms CD Album
www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/.../Best+Of+Brahms.htm
J Brahms - Best Of Brahms music CD album at CD Universe, Track Listing Symphony No, 4 in E minor, Op, 98 Allegro non troppo; Piano Concerto No, 2 in.
J. Brahms Discography and Music at CD Universe ...
www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/artist/J.+Brahms/.../albums.htm
Low prices on J. Brahms discography of music albums at CD Universe, with top rated service, J. Brahms songs, discography, biography, cover art pictures,
Amazon.com: Johannes Brahms Classical Music CDs
www.amazon.com/s?...Johannes%20Brahms...
Results 1 - 12 of 6351 – Online shopping for Johannes Brahms Classical Music CDs from a great selection of Music; & more at everyday low prices. ... ...
Amazon.com: Brahms: Piano Pieces Opp. 116 - 119: Johannes
www.amazon.com Music Classical
This item: Brahms: Piano Pieces Opp. 116 - 119 ~ Johannes Brahms Audio CD. In Stock. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com. Eligible for FREE Super Saver
Shopping results for Brahms CD ...
Busch, Adolf/Münch/Barsin: Busch Spielt Dvorak/Brahms
$20
7 stores
Brahms: the complete symphonies / karajan, berlin po..."
What version do you think it's in currently? They've they've clocked nearly 150k miles on this system. For reference, that's over 50 trips from San Fran to NY, NY.
Or if you'd prefer, about 20 complete laps around the perimeter of the lower 48.
This signature is false.
First a horseless carriage, now a driver-less car?
Next thing you know there will be a box that just sits in front of you, with a window to the world!
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
While I don't share the paranoid viewpoints of some, your argument fails from the outset. Google may not be holding a gun to my head, but a poorly designed AI car can certainly cause as much damage as a pistol (if not more) Let alone the damage that could be caused if poorly designed AI cars achieve fleet numbers.
That said, I trust Google on this one (well, Google plus the powers that be along the approval process) Putting out a shoddy product in this venture would cause a Torches and Pitchforks riot the likes of which haven't been seen in my lifetime. And Google knows it.
This signature is false.
So, why the hell do you use Google's non-working beta software when you can find released software on the Internet? Why the hell do you give them your personal information to sell to advertisers? It's time for *YOU* to step in and do something about them.
Good God man, nobody is forcing Google on you.
+1 Disagree
Goolash. Another fine dish tainted.
Task Mangler
Well... I do; for the US that is.
It was Henry Bliss. He was a real estate agent in NY (no surprise here), killed by a taxicab (still no surprise).
What is interesting, it was an electric car. We got to stay with gas just for the sake of children. http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2011/09/0913first-us-pedestrian-killed-by-car/
Why would he be particularly immortalized? For example if you're looking for the first human to be killed by robots, you don't have to wait for "I, robot" to become reality as that happened already back in 1979. Doesn't mean that robots have went away, people are quite regularly maimed or killed for neglecting safety zones, getting caught in presses and grinders and such. My prediction is that the first person killed by a computer-controlled car will be a Darwin Award winner that would have been killed by a human driver too, had there been one. Don't get me wrong, a computer-controller car won't be better than the people who programmed it and it surely will have bugs, but that one can be refined and get better whereas today every year we let loose a new generation of unskilled teens on the road.
Perhaps the best analogy is healthcare, you know those life-and-death situations you'd think keep everyone on their toes constantly. Well, nurses and doctors are humans too and they make mistakes, not often but they do. Electronic systems that make sure people always get the right medication in the right dosage at the right time, that they don't get dangerous combinations or medicines they're allergic to has helped save lives. Start counting the times the system corrects the nurses versus the times the nurses corrects the system and you'll find out who is actually the more important part of the two.
And that's why I think computer driven cars will win out in the end, they will always stick to protocol. They'll obey all speed limits, keep distance to those in front, always change lanes cleanly, always signal, always yield, always drive defensively and eventually all the accidents that don't happen because a human was tired or angry or sloppy or fiddling with the radio or his phone or whatnot will outperform the "creative" thinking capability of humans. Our ability to make good split-second decisions in an emergency situation is overrated, not to mention the choices are rather limited to break, turn and possibly in a few situations give gas. Many people panic and actually make it worse than just slamming the brakes.
I expect these cars also will have the ability to record near-accidents which you can use for analysis, you don't actually have to have an accident. Here we just managed to perform an emergency brake for a pedestrian who suddenly walked out into the road, could we have done better? Was our response optimal given the data we had? I see a whole new level of preventive improvement possible here. There's no significant learning for me from having one incident every decade, but if you can collect thousands of situations from millions of drivers it can learn to handle the 0.01% situations that we never have any training for or guidelines for what to do.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
My personal feeling is that insurance rates are going to drive the adoption of self driving cars. Once the insurance companies realize that they have a lower error rate than humans (never tired, drunk, distracted, etc) and that they can tell who was at fault in an accident (almost certainly the other guy) you'll see serious incentives to keep cars in auto-drive.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
That sounds like the opposite of being immortalised.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Ahhh, the kilomile. Glad to see metric catching on.
For those interested there's 52 800 000 centifeet in a kilomile, and 83 milliinches in a microfoot.
What is the point of a driverless car?
In order of importance:
1. Increased safety. Did you know that in the US, 1 out of 9,000 people die in a car accident each year? That is freaky high. Over a lifetime that works out to almost a 1% chance. Autonomous cars can be much safer, are never distracted and never get tired.
2. Increased access. Folks who are blind or have other disabilities cannot get around by car. Same for older people or people to young to drive. Same for drunk people..
3. Increased productivity. A car can be your office. Get work done or spend time doing personal reading.
4. Increased fuel efficiency. Autonomous cars will eventually have the ability to work together to draft and save gas milage
5. Decreased costs. Autonomous cars will eventually lead to services where you do not have to buy a car. Simply pay for a ride and have a car show up when you need it.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
People with your mentality are the reason progress takes as long as it does.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year