Toyota Raises Concerns About California Self-Driving Oversight, Calls It 'Preposterous' (reuters.com)

A Toyota official on Tuesday raised concerns about California's plans to require compliance with a planned U.S. autonomous vehicle safety check list, calling it "preposterous." Reuters reports:Hilary Cain, director of technology and innovation policy at Toyota Motor North America, criticized California's proposal to require automakers to submit the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) 15-point safety check list before testing vehicles. "If we don't do what's being asked of us voluntarily by NHTSA, we cannot test an automated system in the state of California. That is preposterous and that means testing that is happening today could be halted and that means testing that is about to be started could be delayed," she said at a Capitol Hill forum. On September 30, California unveiled revised rules that carmakers will have to certify that they complied with the 15-point NHTSA assessment instead of self-driving cars being required to be tested by a third-party, as in the original proposal.

Comments

Why is it preposterous?

[Anonymous Coward]

"If we don't do what's being asked of us voluntarily by NHTSA, we cannot test an automated system in the state of California. That is preposterous and that means testing that is happening today could be halted and that means testing that is about to be started could be delayed"

Well sorry to shit on your parade, lady, but maybe it's not such a bad idea to slow all of this down and get it right. NHTSA isn't the devil. If you want to get angry at someone, go after IIHS. NHTSA is trying to actually keep the rest of us, who may someday interact with your automated system, safe from it.

Re: As it should be

[spire3661]

Truly a well-reasoned and impassioned response to the 30,000 people killed every year, the vast majority of which were caused by direct human inattention to detail. People are the worst drivers imaginable, robots cannot possibly EVER be worse.

Re: As it should be

[ewibble]

Robot may or may not be better, but to say humans are the worst drivers imaginable is a hyperbole. I suppose you let your dog drive because it is safer.

the population of the US is 318 million (I assume that 30,000 is in the US), that is 0.009% of people die, sure it could better. 13,322 people die from falls, given that walking is so much slower are we even worse at walking.

To me it is not apparent that less people will die, if robots drive, you need actual evidence and testing, not wild statements about how bad people are.driving you need use actual facts.

If I died every time my computer had a blue screen I would be dead a long time ago.

Re: As it should be

[arth1]

It's a damn good card. Reducing the fatalities ASAP is the main point and should be our goal.

Why? We trade safety for freedom with a higher risk of fatality in pretty much all aspects of life. It's called living.

The lifetime risk of dying in a car accident is around 0.17%, which I think are very acceptable odds. Certainly much better odds than for the risk of dying from a fall, which is around 0.5%. We could reduce that quite substantially if we lived in padded rooms and moved around with walkers, wearing helmets.
But I prefer the freedom that accepting risks give.
If I die, I will have lived.

Re:As it should be

[Dutch Gun]

"Per billion mile" is a stupid way to measure safety in practical terms. We don't measure our lives in miles or kilometers. We measure them using time.

Let's look at those transportation methods in fatalities per billion hours traveled:

Bus - 11
Rail - 30
Air - 30
Water - 50
Van - 60
Car - 130
Foot - 220
Bicycle - 550
Motorcycle - 4,840
Space Shuttle - 438,019

Now, let's consider how many hours we spend each day in each of these activities. I'd guess I'm in the car an average of perhaps 1 1/2 hours per day. Since nothing else comes close (assuming treadmills don't count as "walking"), I'm at FAR more risk than dying in a car crash than any other transportation method by a very large margin.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. According to your statistics, the space shuttle is only slightly more dangerous than driving in a car and less dangerous than a ferry, which is obvious nonsense.