Slashdot Mirror
Fully Driverless Waymo Taxis Are Due Out This Year, Alarming Critics (arstechnica.com)
Alphabet's Waymo is launching a driverless taxi service in Phoenix in the next three months -- and it's open to the public. But due to the limited regulations surrounding self-driving cars, many critics argue that more regulations are needed to ensure the safety of these vehicles before they roll out for public and commercial use. Ars Technica reports: If a company wants to sell a new airplane or medical device, it must undergo an extensive process to prove to federal regulators that it's safe. Currently, there's no comparable requirement for self-driving cars. Federal and state laws allow Waymo to introduce fully self-driving cars onto public streets in Arizona without any formal approval process. That's not an oversight. It represents a bipartisan consensus in Washington that strict regulation of self-driving cars would do more harm than good.
Mary "Missy" Cummings, an engineering professor at Duke, agrees. "I don't think there should be any driverless cars on the road," she tells Ars. "I think it's unconscionable that no one is stipulating that testing needs to be done before they're put on the road." But so far these advocates' demands have fallen on deaf ears. Partly that's because federal regulators don't want to slow the introduction of a technology that could save a lot of lives in the long run. Partly it's because they believe that liability concerns give companies a strong enough incentive to behave responsibly. And partly it's because no one is sure how to regulate self-driving cars effectively. When it comes to driverless cars, "there's no consensus on what it means to be safe or how we go about proving that," says Bryant Walker Smith, a legal scholar at the University of South Carolina.
Mary "Missy" Cummings, an engineering professor at Duke, agrees. "I don't think there should be any driverless cars on the road," she tells Ars. "I think it's unconscionable that no one is stipulating that testing needs to be done before they're put on the road." But so far these advocates' demands have fallen on deaf ears. Partly that's because federal regulators don't want to slow the introduction of a technology that could save a lot of lives in the long run. Partly it's because they believe that liability concerns give companies a strong enough incentive to behave responsibly. And partly it's because no one is sure how to regulate self-driving cars effectively. When it comes to driverless cars, "there's no consensus on what it means to be safe or how we go about proving that," says Bryant Walker Smith, a legal scholar at the University of South Carolina.
I used to work for a medical device manufacturer. While having to deal with a lot of regulations was certainly annoying (mostly because they are written by lawyers and you need to be a lawyer to really understand them), the great thing about them was that once you complied, you didn't have to worry nearly as much about liability. If there were no regulations (basically a form of self-regulation), then how exactly do you prove that you were not negligent? Maybe you think all the tests you did were enough. Maybe the lawyers you hired for advice thought so too. But you'll never know until it is tested in court. With regulations it is more-or-less black and white as to whether you have done enough to absolve yourself of responsibility for unforeseen events.
Another important point is that regulation creates a powerful barrier to entry in a market. The infrastructure required (in terms of processes and procedures) is immense, and large companies can gain economies of scale for these work. While the tech is enough of a barrier to entry right now, as time goes on this will change for driverless vehicles as well.
They have, the difference is these won't have a backup driver to take over.
It seems to me, that Waymo have the best tech and take the safety aspect very seriously, so I don't see any cause for alarm myself.
If Uber were doing this, then there would be cause for alarm. Regulation is needed, as although Waymo take safety seriously, some of there competitors may not.
I agree completely. As over-the-top safety conscious as Waymo has been taking baby steps all the way to release- if Waymo think they're ready I'm inclined to believe them... but like you, I wouldn't believe some of their competitors.
If Waymo are being premature with this and any harm comes to anyone; you can bet they will get their socks sued off them.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.
And then THEY ALL can be fixed, probably with an over-the-air update. No drunk driving PR campaign, no driver outreach or training, no expensive modification of signage or intersections, etc. This is an advantage. Only a hardware limitation would be similar to the current paradigm, and even then it would be no worse.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
No, this is not accurate.
The Waymo vehicles have been driving around Phoenix, without a driver, for most of this year. The vehicles have been limited to 'beta testers' who could hail a ride. This announcement is really just about the commercial launch of the service. At that point everyone will be able to hail one.
Also the notion that there is no 'backup driver' is false. The driver is just not in the car. If the car gets stuck it will simply stop, turn on the hazard lights, and wait for a remote operator to do something to help.