Depressing recommendations on Autonomous cars

Secret_squirrel · 2022-01-26T09:40:37+00:00

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-60126014 [quote] The law commissions were asked in 2018 to come up with a series of reports on the regulatory framework for automated vehicles and their use on public roads. In this final report, their recommendations include: a user-in-charge cannot be prosecuted for offences arising directly from the driving task, such as dangerous driving, speeding or running a red light, but remains responsible for other tasks, including insurance and checking people are wearing seatbelts some vehicles may be allowed to drive themselves with no-one in the driving seat and a licensed operator responsible for overseeing the journey data to understand fault and liability following a collision must be accessible sanctions for carmakers who fail to reveal how their systems work [/quote] Putting the responsibility on the manufacturer when there is a person in the car is wrong imo. Even in full self-drive someone in the drivers seat should be prepared to break out of self-drive at any second. If we ever get to a place where self-driving cars are allowed to drive whilst empty that should be treated as a different scenario. Ironically I think this will have a chilling effect on autonomous vehicles which is the last thing I want because ultimately a self driving vehicle has the opportunity have cyclist and pedestrian friendly rules programmed into it. Imagine a world where overtakes are always 1.5m+ or where a car will wait until its safe to overtake a bike.

This topic has 9 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by Captain Badger.

Creator

Topic
January 26, 2022 at 9:40 am #31940
Secret_squirrel
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-60126014

[quote]

The law commissions were asked in 2018 to come up with a series of reports on the regulatory framework for automated vehicles and their use on public roads.

In this final report, their recommendations include:
- a user-in-charge cannot be prosecuted for offences arising directly from the driving task, such as dangerous driving, speeding or running a red light, but remains responsible for other tasks, including insurance and checking people are wearing seatbelts
- some vehicles may be allowed to drive themselves with no-one in the driving seat and a licensed operator responsible for overseeing the journey
- data to understand fault and liability following a collision must be accessible
- sanctions for carmakers who fail to reveal how their systems work
[/quote]

Putting the responsibility on the manufacturer when there is a person in the car is wrong imo. Even in full self-drive someone in the drivers seat should be prepared to break out of self-drive at any second.

If we ever get to a place where self-driving cars are allowed to drive whilst empty that should be treated as a different scenario.

Ironically I think this will have a chilling effect on autonomous vehicles which is the last thing I want because ultimately a self driving vehicle has the opportunity have cyclist and pedestrian friendly rules programmed into it. Imagine a world where overtakes are always 1.5m+ or where a car will wait until its safe to overtake a bike.
Creator

Topic

Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

Sort:

Author

Replies
January 27, 2022 at 3:58 pm #988675
0

Captain Badger

This actually makes sense to

This actually makes sense to me. Currently teh car manufacturers can release an inherently dangerous application and when in self drive mode it kills someone, the occupant gets sone, no blame on the manufacturer.

The manufacturer must be made accountable for infractions of any kind but especially injuries intimidation and death, when the vehicle is under the control of the algorithm.

The driver must be made fully aware of whether the vehicle is under self drive mode or not

January 27, 2022 at 3:46 pm #988673
0

wtjs

No matter what the rules, a

No matter what the rules, a cyclist should still choose to be overtaken by an autonomous vehicle, even if controlled by a Raspberry Pi, over a standard UK BMW or Audi driver. The Pi is going to put a lot more thought and consideration for others into the manoeuvre.

January 27, 2022 at 2:33 pm #988671
0

Cycloid

This is may be just what the

This is may be just what the establishment wants.

Imagine if you get taken out by an autonomous vehicle – I’m sure the Cycling UK Defense fund has enough money in the kitty to take on Elon Musk.

January 26, 2022 at 12:58 pm #988669
0

Rich_cb

Direct quote from the article
Direct quote from the article:

“There should be no sliding scale of driverless capabilities – a car is either autonomous or not.

And if any sort of monitoring is required- in extreme weather conditions, for example – it should not be considered autonomous and current driving rules should apply.”

If the recommendations are followed it will be a black and white situation legally.

If you have to sit in the drivers seat then you are responsible. If you don’t then you’re not.

January 26, 2022 at 10:48 am #988665
0

Sriracha

I going to assume that the
I going to assume that the shift to fully autonomous vehicles results in fewer 3rd party KSIs. If that comes at a cost to the correct placement of blame I’m not sure that I mind.

Or put it the other way around, is it worth killing more people if it results in improved justice for the guilty?

In any case, I’m pretty sure many escape justice under the current regime.

January 26, 2022 at 10:42 am #988667
0

hawkinspeter

I read the Garuniad article:

I read the Garuniad article: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/26/self-driving-car-users-should-have-immunity-from-offences-report

It makes sense to me – the law immunity would only be for cars in full self-drive mode and there will be a distinction made between driver assist and full self-drive. There’s also mention that the cars will need to give the driver sufficient time to react in the cases where the car doesn’t know what to do and that the car should be taking appropriate action (slow down and stop) until the person takes over.

January 26, 2022 at 10:31 am #988663
0

Secret_squirrel

Precisely my fear. And if we

Precisely my fear. And if we think insurance companies are a pain to deal with now – whats a corporate legal department going to be like when they will be incentivised to fight it tooth and nail. An insurance company at least starts on the assumption that the will *occasionally* pay out.

January 26, 2022 at 10:21 am #988661
0

bobbypuk

I actually viewed that very

I actually viewed that very positively. Possible outcomes

* manufacturers of self-driving cars will be very risk-averse. Vehicles travelling at slow speed ready to brake in milliseconds if they don’t like what is going on

* self-driving becomes a thing only in controlled environments like motorways

* self driving never happens

I think there’s money in self-driving cars so heopfully we end up with the first option. I would like a self-driving car that does my 8 mile commute in about 45 minutes and I can just read a book. I’ll still take my bike but at least the cars will be a bit more chilled – a self-driving car will not got frustrated and aggressive in heavy traffic.

The current state is the worst state. A Tesla can get you into trouble and they just say “not our problem, we handed control back to the driver, the accident was the driver’s fault”

January 26, 2022 at 10:08 am #988659
0

brooksby

It seems odd to waive the

It seems odd to waive the driver of any responsibility when they are allowed to override the ‘self-driving’ car (and even expected to, in some circumstances).

Does it mean that every traffic collision involving a ‘self-driving’ car would become a corporate manslaughter charge?
Author

Replies

Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.