CA DMV Releases Draft Requirements For Autonomous Vehicles On Public Streets

kheldan writes: The California DMV will be allowing so-called 'autonomous cars' on the roads — with some restrictions. Namely: There must be a licensed driver behind the wheel at all times, alert and ready to take over on a moments notice, who additionally will be requried to obtain special training in the operation of the 'autonomous' vehicle they'll be driving; there must be extensive certification of the vehicle itself, subject to a three-year 'deployment permit', and re-evaluation of the vehicles' performance after that time; and there must be proof from the manufacturer that the vehicle is safe from cyber-attack. Those are the highlights; the full text of the press release is here, on the Calfornia DMV website, and the DMV is encouraging the public to attend workshops in January to discuss the draft regulations.

Comments

Really???

[bobthesungeek76036]

... and there must be proof from the manufacturer that the vehicle is safe from cyber-attack...

Good luck with that one....

Re:Really???

[johnnys]

Agree entirely, but at least they are *trying* to get ahead of the problem.

That's better than the designers of IoT stuff and medical implants who seem to be completely oblivious to the real dangers of cyber attacks.

Re:Really???

[suutar]

The actual requirement from TFpressRelease is "Autonomous vehicles will be equipped with self-diagnostic capabilities that detect and respond to cyber-attacks or other unauthorized intrusions, alert the operator, and allow for an operator override", which sounds easier (but probably isn't).

Re:Really???

[JimMcc]

Ok no proof ... Licensed Professional engineer that said ok to roll out.

My guess is that "there must be extensive certification of the vehicle itself" is taking that into consideration. Nowhere does it say that car companies themselves can just decide on their own that a car is ready for the road.

I suppose this is how we'll transition

[rsilvergun]

To driverless cars. They'll be a driver with the minimal amount of training needed to handle an emergency and the rest gets home by computer. In 30 years the computer will be better at handling the emergencies and the driver will get the boot. My question is what are we gonna do with all the out of work truck drivers. Your not gonna retrain them, there's only so much they can do.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[Lendrick]

During the day and in fair weather, google's cars are already safer than humans.

Given that truck driving accounts for like 5% of the American workforce, I think we're going to have to accept at some point that truck driving and a lot of other skilled professions are eventually going to be automated away, and adjust our economy accordingly, and that includes not punishing the unemployed with the threat of starvation and homelessness.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[Mikkeles]

"They'll be a driver with the minimal amount of training needed to handle an emergency ..."

Handling emergencies is usually where the greatest skill and training is required.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of work truck drivers? What? There's a huge shortage, and the artificial scarcity rules that the Obama administration has forced down our throats has made it worse. I work for a benefits and time clock software company for trucking companies, and the pay for truck drivers has nearly doubled in the past decade for our customers. A truck driver with five years of experience is paid higher around here than my son makes, and he graduated from Ga Tech in EE last December. There's such a severe shortage that the United States Department of Public Safety is talking about allowing criminals and children to get CDLs.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[Higaran]

I run a local trucking company just outside of chicago, and the current state of automated trucks is a joke, they still have along way to go. I could see a yard stopper being automated moving trailers between a parking lot and the docks, but not anything more than that for a long time. The brake systems are run on AIR, so in the winter when everything starts to freeze then you still need someone to pound on them with a hammer to for the pads to release from the drums. Plus it would require a complete redesign of the way the electrical cord and air lines are hooked up from the truck to the trailer, right now the only way to do it is by hand. There are many, many old docks that were even designed for the current max truck length of 53ft, and are supper hard to get into. I just don't see one of those self driving things backing up across 4 lanes of street with normal traffic on it, and then down an alley.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[SeaFox]

I think we're going to have to accept at some point that truck driving and a lot of other skilled professions are eventually going to be automated away, and adjust our economy accordingly, and that includes not punishing the unemployed with the threat of starvation and homelessness.

I know this is a discussion of driverless cars, but I wasn't expecting such wild science fiction.

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[vtcodger]

"Handling emergencies is usually where the greatest skill and training is required."

Yes, if the emergency is black ice, or a gaping hole is opening in the road ahead, or logs are falling off a truck in front of you. But in those cases, the computer is probably going to have to deal with the emergency because there isn't time to switch control over to the driver.

I think maybe an "emergency" from the computer's point of view is a situation it has no clear guidelines to deal with. e.g. the map says there is an off-ramp 100 meters ahead and the route says to take it. But all that is visible is snow. Lots of snow. So what the computer presumably will do is slow to a stop, consult the driver somehow, and call 911 if the driver says to do so.

I sort of think this is new ground and it's going to take a while to sort out the optimum ways for autonomous vehicles to catagorize and handle unexpected situations..

The draft regulation looks OK to me for now, but I do hope the plan to revisit it every year or three

Re:I suppose this is how we'll transition

[vtcodger]

> I just don't see one of those self driving things backing up across 4 lanes of street with normal traffic on it, and then down an alley.

What's the problem? A properly programmed computer can almost certainly do that. And the fact that it has tied up traffic for sixteen blocks in both directions won't bother it a bit. It doesn't care if people are swearing at and waving tireirons. It's a computer.

Re:Can the autonomous vehicle pass a drivers test?

[Daniel_Staal]

Because we know generally what types of failures humans have, and can design our tests around what types of competence we know will be required. Autonomous vehicles are a new situation, and have new failure or competence modes. Until we understand those modes, we can't understand what we need to test for correctly.

By letting them on the road with human drivers as overrides, we are limiting the worst-case modes, and allow for more real-world tests is a larger variety of situations so we can understand those modes.

Re:Can the autonomous vehicle pass a drivers test?

[bws111]

Because the drivers test does not cover everything you will encounter. For example, the other day I was parked in a parking deck at an event. The event ended, and everyone started to leave. But there was some problem near the exit. So they had a cop standing at a different part of the garage, motioning for people to ignore the 'exit' signs, and to drive back down the entrance ramp the wrong way. This put you on a one-way street also heading the wrong way. No problem, because the cops blocked the street. They then motioned you the wrong way down yet another one-way street, where you finally joined up with the normal traffic.

All that is covered by 'follow the directions of the police'. But is an autonomous vehicle going to understand the motions of an officer, and drive the wrong way on several streets? Humans had no problem with it.

So what?

[twotacocombo]

Who really wants a car that you can't manually control yourself, ever? Seems like a real pain in the ass for doing things like moving it a few feet so you can get something out of the garage, or putting it up on ramps so you can change your oil. Plus, I always thought part of the American experience was just going out for a drive for fun. Maybe going a little too fast, taking a corner a little too hot..a bit of adventure. Getting into a car that drives itself sounds about as exciting as riding the old Disneyland People Mover, everywhere you went.

Re:So what?

[queazocotal]

Me, personally. Due to medical problems, I have reaction times that mean I cannot safely drive.
Some sort of vehicle would be very handy.

Really?

[MitchDev]

"There must be a licensed driver behind the wheel at all times, alert and ready to take over on a moments notice"

Kinda defeats the whole purpose of the autonomous car, might as well just drive rather than having to pretend to drive and ready to take the wheel instantly...

Re:Really?

[Ravaldy]

I feel the same but suspect it's temporary until we can start trusting the tech the not so trust worthy humans are building.

Re:Really?

[suutar]

The phrasing of the actual draft requirement is "capable of taking control in the event of a technology failure or other emergency", which need not require instant response, merely being prepared and legally allowed to operate the vehicle when the automation can't. Like in the scenario someone posted above where getting out of a parking deck involved going the wrong way down 3 one-way segments.

Obligatory Princess Bride reference

[bbsguru]

"Autonomous". You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...

So, "self-driving" cars will require licensed drivers with more qualifications than every other car on the road. Brilliant!

Re:Can the autonomous vehicle pass a drivers test?

[ClickOnThis]

But is an autonomous vehicle going to understand the motions of an officer, and drive the wrong way on several streets?

With proper use of beacons, signs and temporary signals, I don't see why not. For example, officers could be supplied with special batons, similar to those used by ground crews at airports.

Quest. Drunk/ancient OK?

[gurps_npc]

That's the real question. Is the 94 year old man that really has no business behind a wheel, an acceptable 'driver' in a driverless car?

And far more commonly, if you've had 12 shots in 2 hours, can you get arrested for being the driver in a driverless car? Will the cop even notice? Will the car test your breath?

Because these are the primary reasons for a normal customer to buy one of these things.

Re:Can the autonomous vehicle pass a drivers test?

[tipo159]

But is an autonomous vehicle going to understand the motions of an officer, and drive the wrong way on several streets?

With proper use of beacons, signs and temporary signals, I don't see why not. For example, officers could be supplied with special batons, similar to those used by ground crews at airports.

Are you saying that autonomous vehicles can only work in redirected traffic if the people redirecting traffic have special batons? So, let's say there is a landslide and the road is partly obstructed and a good samaritan starts playing traffic cop because the real traffic cops can't get through the back up. Or, how about movers or home construction workers or anyone else dealing with an impromptu traffic redirection? How do autonomous vehicles not being able to determine how to follow directions from a person outside of the vehicle not make things worse in these conditions?