[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Imagine one of your loved one dies from a purposeful, pre-programmed decision made by autonomous vehicle, and people tell you "hey- don't worry they'll be safer than humans one day." Nuts.

Before we all grab our ankles, you at least acknowledge that we're taking 3mph over here, right? If we held human drivers to the same standards, jails would be even more full.

From early reports, if the seated driver had been in control, this wouldn't have gone any differently as the pedestrian was not in a crosswalk and possibly in a limited line of sight area.

Autonomous cars will f up, don't worry, but it doesn't sound like this is your huckleberry yet.

[M3_WC]

In the future it would be funny to see states requiring anyone convicted of a DUI, to be forced to use autonomous transportation. Try to help eliminate some drunk driving incidents.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

In the future it would be funny to see states requiring anyone convicted of a DUI, to be forced to use autonomous transportation. Try to help eliminate some drunk driving incidents.

First, amusing reputation, who did you piss off?!

Second, if we just enforced existing laws and made repeat DUI infractions stronger, it wouldn't be a problem. I worked in Germany many years ago and no one drove after a beer or two. It was always cab or subway time at that point.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

First, amusing reputation, who did you piss off?!

You know I never looked at that number before, didn't even realize it was negative...lol. Looking through rep points, I have six -60 infractions dating back to 2009. Back in the day there was a mod on M3 section that had it out for me, I think he is long gone now.

[Red Bread]

Sorry, I appreciated your post, which reduced your badge of honor. I'll remove it if you'd like.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Putting aside the liability challenges and pulling this back in a bit... I am surprised by the general lack of concern by automotive enthusiasts. Where are the "save the manuals" people? They're so against losing control of shifting their transmissions, yet no apparent disgust at losing control over driving entirely? I see incandescent tail lamps evict more passion around here!

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Before we all grab our ankles, you at least acknowledge that we're taking 3mph over here, right?

From early reports, if the seated driver had been in control, this wouldn't have gone any differently as the pedestrian was not in a crosswalk and possibly in a limited line of sight area.

Agreed, 3 mph is very minor. I'll even suppose this is within error of the system. However, i'm making a larger point in regards to the apparent legal risk, if not ethical concerns, of pre-programming law breaking.

The "Failing NY Times" has some good coverage of the scene. To this layman thousands of miles away; it looks like the pedestrian was pretty out in the open and didn't appear to "pop out" into the roadway suddenly.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Putting aside the liability challenges and pulling this back in a bit... I am surprised by the general lack of concern by automotive enthusiasts. Where are the "save the manuals" people? They're so against losing control of shifting their transmissions, yet no apparent disgust at losing control over driving entirely? I see incandescent tail lamps evict more passion around here!

I WANT self driving cars.

Then all the idiots who; can't keep up with traffic, can't merge at a proper speed, cut across three lanes of traffic for their exit, don't know what a yield sign means, people who text and drive, can just get in a car, and stay the hell out of my manual driving way.

[Mingwan]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Putting aside the liability challenges and pulling this back in a bit... I am surprised by the general lack of concern by automotive enthusiasts. Where are the "save the manuals" people? They're so against losing control of shifting their transmissions, yet no apparent disgust at losing control over driving entirely? I see incandescent tail lamps evict more passion around here!

Well, that battle already seems lost unfortunately.

[RM7]

There's a whole generation of us that will never have to worry about the problem of growing old and not being able to safely use a motor vehicle to get around. That's pretty awesome.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by RABAUKE

Yup, but so much easier to assess blame. This will be a legal nightmare, who's responsible. The guy behind the wheel, the programer, Tesla, Donald Trump? As more autonomous vehicles are on the road there will be more problems that the programmers can't foresee....interesting times.....I for one have less than zero interest in driving or owning one.

I have zero interest in being run over by one too.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Putting aside the liability challenges and pulling this back in a bit... I am surprised by the general lack of concern by automotive enthusiasts. Where are the "save the manuals" people? They're so against losing control of shifting their transmissions, yet no apparent disgust at losing control over driving entirely? I see incandescent tail lamps evict more passion around here!

I hope Uber gets the living shit sued out of it and the litigation puts this whole autonomous nonsense out to pasture.

Good enough?

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I hope Uber gets the living shit sued out of it and the litigation puts this whole autonomous nonsense out to pasture.

Good enough?

Close- The vehicle manufacturer, human driver safeguard, and autonomous systems manufacturer should be held responsible too.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

There's a whole generation of us that will never have to worry about the problem of growing old and not being able to safely use a motor vehicle to get around. That's pretty awesome.

Or lame. It's a right of passage to young males. This just makes men even less of men going forward.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

There's a whole generation of us that will never have to worry about the problem of growing old and not being able to safely use a motor vehicle to get around. That's pretty awesome.

There is already that ability - take senior center bus, Uber / Lyft or other form of transportion if worried about being able to safely drive. Really, is there much of a difference between having your own car you can't actually drive vs. using another form of transportion that is already available?

The problem is that people typically don't accept they aren't able to safely drive so being forced to use a self-driving car in your later years may seem like a great idea when young, but it may not when you reach that point.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

There is already that ability - take senior center bus, Uber / Lyft or other form of transportion if worried about being able to safely drive. Really, is there much of a difference between having your own car you can't actually drive vs. using another form of transportion that is already available?

Yep, the ability to go where you want with it, when you want, uber/lyft isn't going to wait around all day or go out to the boonies, visit family members, etc. I can imagine many situations that wouldn't work with what you are saying above. I mean, you just told me why you think no one should have a car, because you could just take uber right now, right?

[RM7]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

Or lame. It's a right of passage to young males. This just makes men even less of men going forward.

Right, it'll be much worse than running stoplights and ramming people with late model buicks.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Yep, the ability to go where you want with it, when you want, uber/lyft isn't going to wait around all day or go out to the boonies, visit family members, etc. I can imagine many situations that wouldn't work with what you are saying above. I mean, you just told me why you think no one should have a car, because you could just take uber right now, right?

Where did I say people who can drive themselves shouldn't have a car?

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Quotes from a brand new March 2018 report called AUTOMATED VEHICLES: LIABILITY CRASH COURSE

In re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration—or commonly known as “the Toyota Unintended Acceleration Litigation” (Toyota UA litigation)1 demonstrates that product liability litigation costs can be enormous and could bankrupt even well-established players in the industry, or, at a minimum, cause a major, multi-billion-dollar loss to a company.

The product liability industry in the United States should not be underestimated, as automobiles are among the most-litigated products. More importantly, from a technological complexity point of view, the Toyota case is a microcosm of what could transpire in a typical product liability claim against an automated driving system (ADS), and it can be used as a benchmark to conclude that the costs of litigating such a case would be extreme.

It is important to note that under the current liability framework, a “manufacturer” is not limited to the manufacturer of the complete automobile—everyone in the supply chain is potentially liable.

Consumer acceptance of automated vehicles is mixed, as has been shown in J.D. Power research since 2012, with 47% of respondents saying they “definitely” or “probably would” ride in a fully automated vehicle and 46% saying they “definitely” or “probably would not.”

[autonomous driving system] technologies and vehicles should not anticipate relief from civil liability under the current framework for federal preemption set out by the Motor Vehicle Safety Act

As the automotive industry is undergoing the most significant transformation in its 130-year history, new legal liability challenges emerge. In addition to gaining consumers’ trust in the technology, the successful deployment of ADS is contingent on the ability to effectively deal with the legal liabilities when an ADS accident occurs.

Potentially troubling for carmakers is that the percentage of younger people, those most likely to use autonomous vehicles in the future, who said they'd seek litigation was higher than that of older generations -- 62 percent of Generation Z, those born between 1995 and 2014, said they would pursue litigation, compared with 53 percent of baby boomers.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Right, it'll be much worse than running stoplights and ramming people with late model buicks.

Exactly you learn to be responsible for your own actions instead of letting someone else think and act for you.

[yousefnjr]

Originally Posted by glennQNYC

Putting aside the liability challenges and pulling this back in a bit... I am surprised by the general lack of concern by automotive enthusiasts. Where are the "save the manuals" people? They're so against losing control of shifting their transmissions, yet no apparent disgust at losing control over driving entirely? I see incandescent tail lamps evict more passion around here!

Meh. Self driving or not, manuals are going away. The old cars are still here (for now) at least. The way I see it, if everybody else gets a self-driving EV, the roads I travel will be safer and there will be more gas left for me bring on the revolution

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by yousefnjr

The way I see it, if everybody else gets a self-driving EV, the roads I travel will be safer and there will be more gas left for me bring on the revolution

"Fine for thee, but not for me." Got it.