Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Transportation Department Calls For 'Summit' On Autonomous Cars (reuters.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the sign-of-the-times dept.

Auto manufacturers, technology companies, road safety advocates and policy makers will attend a March 1 conference over potential government actions that could speed the rollout of autonomous cars, the U.S. Transportation Department said on Friday. Reuters reports: Next month's "summit" is to help "identify priority federal and non-federal activities that can accelerate the safe rollout" of autonomous vehicles, the department said. It will also be open to the public. The U.S. National Highway Traffic-Safety Administration (NHTSA) wants comments on what research to conduct before deciding whether to eliminate or rewrite regulations. It could take the agency years to finalize rule changes, and advocates are pushing Congress to act. The March 1 meeting at the department's headquarters in Washington will include "several stakeholder breakout sessions on various topics related to automation," NHTSA said.

38 comments

  1. Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Hetero · · Score: 1

    Beau, why?

    1. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pushing?" You think Slashdot is using its vast editorial powers to direct the world toward autonomous vehicles? Or is it possible that this is an important subject for both technology and the world economy, and it therefore shows up in the news pretty frequently?

    2. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Hetero · · Score: 2

      All stories alternate between three topics with no break:

      1. "Evil Russians"
      2. Al non-stories
      Some other SJW/marketing nonsense

      Unfortunately, some like you learned neither reading comprehension or to be aware of silent agendas. I would like to know in this case what is with #2. Slashdot used to have good articles on, say, a change in how device tree overlays are handled, or an article on the current state of RESTful design. It is little to none of that anymore. The faux-editors don't know anything and have been given instructions from their bosses in Dubai. When it was kdawson, samzenpus, taco, et al., these guys at least were in circles where real tech was being discussed, even if they didn't know too much about it themselves. It's really sad when cloning Timothy Lord into a worker pool of 30 pocket protector bearing threads knocking heads with each other would be preferable to THIS.

    3. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Autonomous cars are many years off, at least a decade.

      Let me know when you have one that can work in a construction zone, police manually directing traffic, accident scenes, even the recent snows here in Michigan. Among other situations.

      But this site keeps pushing this subject. Over and over and over ad infinitum.

    4. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your bitch tears are delicious, Beau is doing an excellent job of making your uneducated Republican faggots cry yourselves to death. If only you died faster and cried less somehow.

    5. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Your bitch tears are delicious, Beau is doing an excellent job of making your uneducated Republican faggots cry yourselves to death. If only you died faster and cried less somehow.

      Beau? Is that you?

    6. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All stories alternate between three topics with no break:

      1. "Evil Russians"
      2. Al non-stories
      Some other SJW/marketing nonsense

      This is not true. You do not believe that this is true. You are actively and willfully choosing to be a liar.

    7. Re:Why does Slashdot keep pushing this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are the latest 10 stories on the front page right now:

      • Researchers Discover Efficient Way To Filter Salt, Metal Ions From Water
      • Why Hiring the 'Best' People Produces the Least Creative Results
      • NSA Sent Coded Messages From Its Twitter To Communicate With Foreign Spies
      • Android Wear Is Getting Killed, and It's All Qualcomm's Fault
      • Researchers Are Developing An Algorithm That Makes Smartphones Child-Proof
      • Ask Slashdot: What Is Missing In Tech Today?
      • US Transportation Department Calls For 'Summit' On Autonomous Cars
      • Hackers Manage To Run Linux On a Nintendo Switch
      • Budget Deal Has Tax Credit Extensions For Nuclear, Fuel Cells, Carbon Capture
      • Rejoice: Samsung's Next Flagship Smartphone Looks To Keep the Headphone Jack Alive
      • Detroit Decides Against Banning Airbbnb -- For Now

      None is about "evil Russians." Two may be related to AI (Autonomous cars, child-proof smartsphones). Two may be marketing (Android wear, Samsung phone). One may be related to "SJW" (Hiring diverse teams). That's five of the ten. Explain how, say, efficient water filtering fits in to one of your three categories? Or NSA sending messages through twitter?

  2. Sell them as a way to get home from the bar by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    No more DUI charges for me!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  3. Thanks but no-thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd rather keep my 6-speed.

    1. Re:Thanks but no-thanks. by hardburlyboogerman · · Score: 1

      As far as that goes,A few items that seems to be overlooked in the plans for an autonomous car rollout -
      1. Who is Liable when there is no human driver,just an AI, in an accident? The Manufacturer? The rider? Who?
      2.The robot drivers might be OK for the urban areas,but worse than useless in rural areas where even decent landline phones, reliable electric lines and paved roads are not always available,let alone a wireless grid to help guide the vehicles.
      I live in Southeastern Kentucky,which clearly has Third World conditions with infrastructure - with no one in any industry or Government giving a damn nor any plans to improve it anytime soon.
      3.Cost - the more features any given vehicle has,the greater the cost and vehicles which barely last long enough to get them paid off before they fall apart.
        I,for one,am not willing to pay $60000 or more for a car or truck that won't last 5 years.
      Hell I drive a 19 year old Ford Ranger pickup and don't plan on replacing it anytime in the future.Buses and Public transportation doesn't exist here.What then? back to riding a horse or walking to town? (With me having a prosthetic right leg,that isn't a viable option either)
      These MUST BE Answered before you can fully turn loose AI driven cars everywhere.

      --
      Geek Hillbilly
  4. Seems to me by oldgraybeard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When the public is banned from driving in an area or on a specific road. I say all public funding for everything related to that road is ended. The road should be purchased by the corporations that want to use it and they should pay all ongoing/upgrade costs and property taxes due on said private property.

    The tax payers should not be expected to just hand over public property at no charge or accept the cost of improving or operating a public property for the sole benefit of specific corporations.

    For driver less cars to actually work, the roadways must be totally redesigned and embedded with some type of sensor network, etc. And driver less can not mix with self driven vehicles the way I see things going. Also, they will only work in the next 20-30 years in pristine conditions. Thus no snow, ice, heavy rains, etc.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

    1. Re:Seems to me by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

      Should have added puts on flame suit ;) lol

    2. Re:Seems to me by umghhh · · Score: 1

      not sure about roads - I think some additional equipment may be necessary if the cars are to be fully autonomous. Other than that I have a problem with your assertion that tax payers should not be expected to pay for something. The only thing required from tax payers is to pay taxes. Nothing less and nothing more. There is no opportunity to take part in decision making as to what this money is going to be spent on etc. As a citizen (which is different from tax payer in many ways) usually you have a right to vote for some people to represent you. This right is usually mistaken for a right to take part in a republic (like in old republics in ancient Greece). Other than that if you are lucky nobody will harass you if you pay and occasionally submit yourself to military. There are very few states in this world where the right to elect is augmented with actual right to say something about the direction the state is to take, I know only about Switzerland. The rest is max at level of the Netherlands - they have the referendum and the government is obliged to take valid referendum into account but hey - did they the last time Dutch voted against something? So we can safely assume that if you are not a citizen of Switzerland living there you have no right and possibility to influence how your tax money is spent.

    3. Re: Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jury duty is a legal requirement. The Dutch rejected the Eu-Ukraine agreement in 2016.

    4. Re:Seems to me by oldgraybeard · · Score: 2

      Interesting comment, I had to think about it a bit.
      I think it comes down to this.
      "Other than that I have a problem with your assertion that tax payers should not be expected to pay for something. The only thing required from tax payers is to pay taxes. Nothing less and nothing more."

      Not sure about all the Switzerland talk. So as a US citizen I am required to pay taxes (the government takes their cut, under the penalty of law,. not because I think the amount is right) but I should just trust and not comment on how government uses tax dollars?

      Seems odd to me since I think the government throws away/squanders 40%+ of the tax dollars we send to them.

      Just my 2 cents ;)

    5. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a driverless car cannot cope with the roads as they are today, the idea is dead on arrival. You cannot put sensors and beacons along all roads in the country and expect them to work reliably all the time. They will fail, get stolen or shot at. A human driver can make sense of a shot up traffic sign... A shot up beacon/sensor might just as well not be there at all.

      They will either make it work as well an above average human driver on all roads (including gravel and non-paved roads) in all weather conditions that humen driver can deal with (including heavy rain and snow), or it won't happen. The moment the driverless car has to pull over and the human passenger (who has a driver's license) knows that he could still drive, that car will be returned to the dealer.

    6. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For driver less cars to actually work, the roadways must be totally redesigned and embedded with some type of sensor network, etc. And driver less can not mix with self driven vehicles the way I see things going.

      We already have tech that satisfies those requirements. They're called driverless trains. (In practice, most train systems have drivers because trains have enough passengers that the cost of the driver per-passenger is small enough that paying a driver isn't that big a deal.) The driverless car projects are about developing new tech that can handle existing roads without modification. You can be skeptical of the chance of any group achieving that goal but don't misrepresent what their goals are.

    7. Re:Seems to me by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      How are trains at parallel parking?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    8. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps. But here is what will happen.

      The big companies will buy the local boards and state political critters.

      At that point only the big companies will be allowed on the roads. They will pay road taxes and sales tax (maybe).

      The large companies will not let you buy a self driving car. So you have to basically rent always.

      The 'poor' will get subsidies. The rich will find ways to buy their own. The middle class will always rent.

    9. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of US tax payers seem to think they should have a line item veto for every government expenditure. And this can be problematic because less than 50% of the US population even pay federal taxes. If there were votes or referendums on every government spending choice should a person that doesn't pay federal income taxes even get a vote?

    10. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are trains at parallel parking?

      Trains only park parallel to each other.

    11. Re:Seems to me by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      UNless the corporation is a utility company, heavily regulated.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    12. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is literally nothing preventing you from going; making your voice heard; and seeing how and why your tax dollars are being spent.

      If there IS something preventing you from doing that; you should REALLY go do something about that;

      Rather than sitting at home typing incorrect responses to people you've never met; about problems you likely don't have; why not go *DO* something that makes a difference?

    13. Re:Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minor change - if the roadways cannot be shared between "normal and autonomous cars, then the companies selling the auto cars should built their own roads for use by the autonomous cars and trucks.

    14. Re:Seems to me by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      There is literally nothing preventing you from going; making your voice heard; and seeing how and why your tax dollars are being spent.

      If there IS something preventing you from doing that; you should REALLY go do something about that;

      Rather than sitting at home typing incorrect responses to people you've never met; about problems you likely don't have; why not go *DO* something that makes a difference?

      What, do you actually think nobody is trying?

      Try Googling "stonewalls FOIA requests". Some don't respond, some just flat out tell you you've received everything you're going to get from them, which is typically "no responsive documents" when it's obvious from other sources and evidence that relevant documents most certainly do exist. The courts and lawyers slow-walk it such that you'd grow old waiting for a resolution with endless stays, reschedules, motions, appeals, etc etc etc.

      Hell, the US Congress often cannot get government agencies, departments, etc and their officials to provide data/documents when legally required by law to do so! Hard drives are being wiped/smashed/Bleach-Bitted after becoming material evidence, files are being deleted, possibly even murder committed, and surprise-surprise, nobody is going to jail.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    15. Re:Seems to me by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      There would be a huge uprising before that happens. Most average Americans don't care right now, but if they try to enforce a law 'you must use a service or a $150K vehicle or you can't drive'... Oh yeah Americans will be uprising like you have never seen it before.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    16. Re: Seems to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with your first point, but only that.

      Driverless cars have proven to be safer than human drivers even when mixed. So I have no problem with them mixing.

      However I believe there should be some way for us and police to determine which cars are diverless and which are not and at what time. And if a car is in or not in this state and the car detects and accident the car should have a way to prove this. We are already seeing people atempting to abuse this.

  5. Don't delay the next industrial revolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just set it up so that laid off drivers get a basic income and use the taxes from self driving car sales to pay for it.

  6. Turn Signals! by fullback · · Score: 1

    I canâ(TM)t wait for AI so we can have cars using turn signals again like they were decades ago.

    Iâ(TM)ve been out of the country for a while, so I didnâ(TM)t realize that American car companies stopped installing turn signals.

    Will AI cars rush as fast as possible from red light to red light, just so the passengers can get home really, really fast, so they can sit on the couch and eat potato chips?

    1. Re:Turn Signals! by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      This is the 21st Century. We come home and eat nachos.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    2. Re:Turn Signals! by PPH · · Score: 1

      Will AI cars rush as fast as possible from red light to red light

      No. They will stop and wait patiently for the homeless people pushing shopping carts down the middle of the street. No automated horn or recording of "Move it, dirtbag!"

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Turn Signals! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like, wow, man. Have you been out of the country since everyone was driving hippie buses while popping quaaludes or blotters? Since then, we had cars get a lot more powerful so they could actually accelerate, and everyone cycled through things like pcp, cocaine, speedballs, and meth. Everyone drove fast and liked it, and those that were afraid drove fast anyway so they wouldn't get shot.

      To those who witnessed that era, it feels like we're back to people driving slowly between lights as if they are on tranquillizers, but with fewer hand-painted flowers and grateful dead stickers. As far as I can tell, it's a combination of smartphone zombies unaware that they are actually driving, and a lot of boomers reaching senility and not being able to handle things that move.

  7. Brace yourself... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For strange accidents that didnâ(TM)t need to happen because all this immature technology is being foisted on the general public. Why canâ(TM)t these systems be tested with simulations before actual road tests?

  8. Doomed to fail by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    Now that the government is involved, this will make things all better. /sarc

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  9. I've Seen This Movie by mentil · · Score: 1

    During the summit, an autonomous car bursts into the room and kills everyone. Thus, starts the war between the Autobots and humanity.
    What's that you say, the Autobots were the good guys? Michael Bay must've been paid off to repeat that propaganda.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  10. There is no way to have a 'safe roll-out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SDCs will cause deaths. It will be a disaster, people will die. The shit excuse for AI is not up to the job. I'll be glad when the whole idea is shit-canned and banned permanently.