Slashdot Mirror
UK Government Releases Rules To Get Self-Driving Cars Onto Public Roads
rippeltippel writes: Ars Technica UK reports that the UK government has released the rules to get self-driving cars onto public roads. As the article reports, drivers will be required to have "a high level of knowledge about the technology used" (i.e. they'll be techies) and — most notably — will have to mimic the act of driving, to avoid confusing other drivers. The original PDF can be viewed here.
This actually reminds me of the Red Flag Laws that were passed when automobiles first began appearing. Because, obviously, the most important thing for an automobile is to avoid spooking the livestock, er, human drivers for whom the roads are really intended.
I hope I live to see the day when driving manually on a public road is viewed the same way as herding livestock or riding a horse on a public road -- quaint and interesting, but mostly disruptive, and almost never actually done.
Assuming that mimic the act of driving doesn't mean putting on makeup, shaving or brushing your teeth (no, I didn't RTFA but this is the UK so I think I'm pretty safe in thinking it does not mean brushing your teeth), then doesn't this pretty much defeat the whole idea of having a self driving car? I guess it might still allow the use of a self driving car by someone physically unable to drive for himself, but personally I would rather have a driver who is capable of taking over and driving if the need presents itself than a pretender who acts like they can drive but can't really.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
"When an automobile approaches an intersection, the driver shall exit the automobile and stand in the intersection waving a lit lantern for 30 seconds, looking down each road, and blowing a loud horn, all so as to alert gentlemen on horses and peaceful ladies that they not be startled.
"Once this is done and the road clear, the automobile may be walked through the intersection. After the automobile is through, the driver shall remove his overcoat, jacket, shirt, and that thing that always flips up in Curly's face, and beat pennance into his own back with a switch of not less than 10 thorns or a whip of not less than three tails."
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Do they really think anybody is going to have a "high level knowledge of the technology"? There's no way in hell Google is going to let anybody product engineers know any of the details, so unless they mean "the computer, it does the driving bits" there isn't a damned thing people will know.
And the sitting there pretending to drive? Well, that's what happens when clueless lawmakers try to pass laws about technology they don't remotely understand.
But, whatever, the flying^Wself-driving car isn't something which will catch on in any meaningful sense of the word ... people aren't going to buy these because they don't care, or because the benefits will be very limited.
Like so many things the futurists tell us are coming Real Soon Now, the world isn't going to be re-tooled to account for this, and they will have to coexist with human drivers for a VERY long time to come. But if they think society is going to spend billions and billions of dollars changing the existing infrastructure to suit their pipedream, they're delusional.
But, hey, that's what futurists are for. Telling us about stuff which sounds cool but which are otherwise not likely to happen as claimed.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Must be.. that's why we're still riding horses, oh and we have some of the best road safety in the world. We'll be just fine. Fascists, wow.
The whole point of getting a self-driving car is so I can be doing other things other than driving a car. If I have to mimic driving then what's the point since I won't be able to do those other things.
I'm surprised it took this long for the bureaucrats to issue silly regulations. I mean, they're only 20 years behind.
Having looked at the proposed regs, they kinda make sense.... if every Tom, Dick, and Harry were to be driving a self-driving car. If any schmuck with a bit of disposable income had a self-driving car, then overbearingly specific regulations might make sense. However (outside of a perhaps very rare to nonexistent hobbyist (this ain't a cheap game)), all of the self driving cars are owned and operated by large institutions. Since these institutions 1) have deep pockets, and 2) care greatly about their reputation, I can write appropriate regulations in a tweet:
"Self-driving cars shall be bonded for 2 million dollars each against damage to life and property, burden of proof lying against the owner."
Tweak the amount per currency or the value you place on life as you see fit, so long as the amount of the bond is whinging enough to keep out rich fools.
states that "A Code of Practice for testing". So these measures are for allowing clear guidelines on how driverless cars should be TESTED on the road. This code doesnt relate to driverless cars when driven by the public. Hence, the tester should have indepth knowledge of the systems in place and not distract other drivers by not following expectations ( e.g. hidden from view ).
I think the goal of governments both authoritarian and democratic (but I repeat myself) is to set the wheels in motion (pun intended) to remove even the option of quasi-anonymous large-scale movements of their citizens; a mobile Panopticon, if you will.
When I think of autos, I frequently think of the folks in the Great Depression that drove out of the Dust Bowl and headed to California to start a new life. I suspect more than a few of them left behind mortgages and land payments in their wake. Starting from scratch somewhere else will never be allowed again by the Powers that Be.
A variation of the speech from Inherit the Wind: "You sir, will be allowed your self-driving car, but before you leave town for good, it will drive you to the bank to make sure your financial affairs are in order."
"...mimic the act of driving..."? Look down/sideways/backwards/just not ahead, yap on phone, read newspaper, & eat breakfast simultaneously? Pretend to swerve out of lane? Flip people off? Sleep? Oh, wait, UK, sorry... I'm thinking of us in the US.
Yeah, but where's the fun in that?
I enjoy the adrenaline rush of firing up the fun performance cars I've had over the years, and hitting the road.
I feel sad for those folks that see a car as nothing more than rote transportation from A to B.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Huh? The worst polluters are the ones who drive oversized SUVs in the name of 'safety' - they're having no fun at all in their cars, I promise you.
OTOH a not-especially-polluting car can be an awful lot of fun to drive, eg. my MR2 gets about 30mpg and I don't drive it gently.
No sig today...
Hey, life is short and I'm only on this planet for a short time.
Perhaps, but I plan to be around for a while longer, not to mention my kids and their kids.
You may want to go out 'in a blaze of glory', but I want to leave something for the next generation.
I don't read AC A human right
It is primarily about the psychological aspect. If you saw a car driving without a driver, you would have the police have panicked calls. Same if the person is reading at the wheel or whatnot. This is not about taking over the wheel, this is about not panicking the other drivers with a behavior which is unexpected on the road. My guess is that such requirement would be dropped after a while when self driving car pick up. But as long as 99.9% of the driver have a certain expectation, you pretty much have to deliver that expectation even in a self driving car.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Your libertarian beliefs are at the full on insane level. They have long since parted with any resemblance to reality.
Good governance on dangerous new technology is precautionary. You don't wait till people are killed to create regulations. You regulate first, then ease off the regulations as safety is demonstrated.
Name something fun that doesn't pollute the planet in one way or another? Unless you are sitting in a cold dark cave beating a rock against the wall for fun, you are polluting the planet.
Going for a walk on a beautiful day with my family... enjoying the fresh air and getting some exercise...
Have you ever made rules that other people have to follow? feelsgoodman.jpg
Most people have an inner fascist. Fortunately there are HOAs and school boards to satisfy them before they become the next Hitler.
Dance like you're hurt, Love like you need money, and work when somebody's watching.
-Scott Adams
Dangerous. You keep using that word. I don't believe it means what you think it means.
That's another thing you're wrong about then. Dangerous means exactly what I think it does. Cars can and do kill people. Cars have design defects that can and do kill people. Autonomous cars are new technology that is very likely to have design defects.
Consider that EVERY new innovation has safety implications.
And to the level that new innovations have safety implications they should be and are regulated.
You have an irrational belief that companies will do the right thing in the absence of regulations. History shows you are wrong. Regulations came about, despite plenty of resistance, because businesses kept on killing people unnecessarily. For example the Bradford Poisoner case, where where due to padding out foodstuffs with cheap filler (in an analogous way to how drugs are cut) and bad working practice at a pharmacy, 21 people were killed by eating humbugs (a type of candy). It's because of such cases that businesses are regulated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Broadly applied, this mentality would seize the works entirely.
It is broadly applied, and the works are not seized. Therefore you are wrong.
You think they have driven 2 million miles on a "few square miles" of streets?
Yes. Because up until a few months ago ALL testing was done on private test tracks. Most of the 2 million miles was not on public streets.
They could have stopped that a long time ago, they have gotten permits to drive them in several public places, and all the scanning and mapping in the world does nothing for dealing with human drivers around them.
The vast majority of the small amount miles done on public roads have all be done in Mountain View, on sunny days, only under certain conditions (ie no railway crossings, no roundabouts, no unsealed roads etc etc with operators who take over when the AI freaks out. The latest incarnation of Google robot car, ie the one designed for public street testing, is speed limited to 25mph.
ie All testing so far has been under controlled circumstances.
What is so sad is that this is supposed to be a tech web site, and what we have is a bunch of people afraid of technology.
As a Tech person I consider it my job to sort the real data from the marketing material. The really sad part is that not all of us so-called techies seem able to demonstrate similar skills.