Slashdot Mirror
Ford, GM and Toyota Collaborate For Self-Driving Safety Rules (detroitnews.com)
Ford, General Motors, and Toyota have formed a new consortium called the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium (AVSC) to develop safety standards for self-driving cars. "The newly formed Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium in conjunction with the auto engineering association SAE International says it will fill a critical need by providing a safety framework around which autonomous technology can responsibly evolve before self-driving vehicles are put into widespread use," reports The Detroit News. From the report: Being able to advance the safe deployment of fully self-driving cars represents a new step toward the benefits the technology will bring, said Edward Straub, director of automation for SAE and executive director of the new consortium. Straub said the automakers in the new consortium would turn information discovered through their self-driving testing over to SAE committees every three to six months, and the information would be discussed in public SAE sessions as a set of guidelines are being developed.
Straub said other automakers and technology companies would be welcome to join the consortium, provided they have experience testing fully autonomous cars. The announcement of the new partnership may be a reaction to the inability of Congress to pass legislation that would allow car manufacturers to sell thousands of self-driving vehicles in the near future, said Michelle Krebs, senior analyst for Autotrader. "GM, Ford and Toyota clearly saw a need to set standards that eventually may become regulations because the proposed regulations, which had been moving quickly, have now stalled," she said. Straub said the automakers in the new consortium are operating independently of the efforts to pass legislation in Congress.
Straub said other automakers and technology companies would be welcome to join the consortium, provided they have experience testing fully autonomous cars. The announcement of the new partnership may be a reaction to the inability of Congress to pass legislation that would allow car manufacturers to sell thousands of self-driving vehicles in the near future, said Michelle Krebs, senior analyst for Autotrader. "GM, Ford and Toyota clearly saw a need to set standards that eventually may become regulations because the proposed regulations, which had been moving quickly, have now stalled," she said. Straub said the automakers in the new consortium are operating independently of the efforts to pass legislation in Congress.
Each car can electronically compare purchase price with each other, most expensive car gets right of way, least expensive car gets the ditch.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The right to repair guarantees that it's the *customer* who is the backstop of ethical behaviour of their vehicle, which is exactly where it should be. I do not want the decision of who my car is going to kill going to be made by some company that owes it's existence on sucking on the government bailout tit.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
It will be a long way before the bicycle manufacturers come up with self-driving bicycles so they are not invited to the party. And concerning pedestrians, they are in the category 'humans' which are in general considered to be too incapable doing anything beynd posting messages on social media.
Toyota is handling the braking controls. Ford is working on automatic rollover prevention. GM is developing a new system to replace ignition controls. What could go wrong?
Also:
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Actually, no, we really don't, despite the old guard car companies' near-constant insistence that it is somehow critical. There's no plausible design for an inter-car communication protocol that can't be forged, and if you can't trust the data coming in, you can't really do much useful with it, so what's the point of even sending it? It's not as if the difference between the few milliseconds it takes for a computer to recognize what's happening visually and the few nanoseconds it takes to decode the signal electronically is going to make any real difference anyway, in practice.
Also, traffic control devices had better be visually obvious enough that humans can recognize them, or else they won't work, and if they are, then computers don't need any additional electronic communication. It just introduces more opportunities for bugs and hacking.
This, I agree with. Of course, making that happen around the world is about as likely as Tesla reaching level 5 autonomy in 2019. :-)
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
I'm pretty sure that if traffic was all cars we'd have self-driving cars by now, for the simple reason that cars are bound by traffic rules. If it's an intersection and you're running a red light there's not much doubt who's at fault. If the rules are too ambiguous we can always make them clearer until say a lane merger is properly described and you can put a car's behavior into "at fault" or "not at fault". Right now we're trying to work backwards from "do not crash" into behavior that won't ever cause a crash and that's probably not happening, if you're a dick it's not hard to get other cars in trouble in ways that today would be considered a joint fault. And if you're trying to be a dick like speed matching a car overtaking you close to 100% at fault. We're going to have to describe correct behavior better and then deal with the rest in court.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Tesla released its first Vehicle Safety Report after the third quarter of 2018. During that period, the electric car maker registered one accident or crash-like event for every 3.34 million miles driven with Autopilot active, and one accident or crash-like event for every 1.92 million miles driven with Autopilot disengaged
Sounds like a way to make rules that will see that others are always at fault. The reason O think that us because it is two US and a japanese company.
It is telling if the company that gave up the patent for 3 ppint safety belts is not part of it.
Sounds like a health research group from the tobacco industry.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I think you haven't been to a dealer lately. It's more like $1000 labor plus $500 for a 250GB drive.
A car may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A car must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A car must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.