Google's Driverless Cars Legally Approved

[ZiprHead]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/02/10/googles-driverless-cars-are-now-legally-the-same-as-a-human-driver/

"If you hop into one of Google's pod-like self-driving cars, you won't be considered the driver, according to a letter sent to Google by federal transportation officials.

Instead, the law will treat the car's software as the driver."

Also just heard a report of a driverless delivery vehicle ready to go. It has compartments that can only be opened by the package recipient's pin number. UPS, FedEx drivers must be feeling nervous.

 

[Nexus]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

 

[Deepak]

In what sense is this legal 'approval' for Google's cars?

 

[ksen]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

The driverless cars will be accompanied by weaponized, umanned drones.

 

[Jayjay]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

That's why they look like this:

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I hope google has auto liability insurance.

aa

 

[fast]

I can out drive it. I can avoid intentional threats. Can it? If you wanted to rear-end it, you could. Try to hit me and you'll miss.

 

[TV and credit cards]

I can out drive it. I can avoid intentional threats. Can it? If you wanted to rear-end it, you could. Try to hit me and you'll miss.

And I'm not easily confused by snowflakes.

 

[ZiprHead]

In what sense is this legal 'approval' for Google's cars?

It means the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration has approved them for use on US public roadways.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

Right now nothing. Hackers can hijack most late model GM cars through the OnStar system and cause them to accelerate or brake remotely no matter who is behind the wheel.

 

[ZiprHead]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

Right now nothing. Hackers can hijack most late model GM cars through the OnStar system and cause them to accelerate or brake remotely no matter who is behind the wheel.

Last I heard just recently, GM is far superior at cyber-security with their latest software updates than many other car makers.

As far as security from hijacking, designers of driverless delivery vehicles would be pretty stupid to not take that into account. Then again, VW.

 

[Iznomneak]

I hope google has auto liability insurance.

aa

There is an interesting dilemma with the automation software:

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/

The question boils down to: Do you get in a car that might be programmed to kill you?

 

[Deepak]

In what sense is this legal 'approval' for Google's cars?

It means the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration has approved them for use on US public roadways.

But that's not true - neither the article or the letter indicate that. This is basically a clarification on specific items which relate to the status of the 'driver' in a driverless car.

A simple search for the term 'exemption from these provisions' shows that there are still areas where Google would need to petition for exemptions and it clearly states that Google cannot be certified for the sections regarding manual control of turn-signals and headlights.

 

[Deepak]

I hope google has auto liability insurance.

aa

I'd suspect that this would probably be rolled into homeowner's or renter's insurance rather than Google's auto policy.

 

[Nexus]

Let me specify my concern with robot delivery. Obviously anything can be hijacked but an automated deliver vehicle would be much easier. It would be carrying valuable merchandise so organized thieves have greater motive to target them. You wouldn't need sophisticated hacking. Just something to block its path and a handheld blow torch to disintegrate the tires then pry open the cargo. As long as a robot vehicle is traveling with public safety as a concern impeding it would be trivially easy.

Amazon drones wouldn't have this problem. But I don't see a future for robots replacing trucking without Orwellian surveillance and very quick police response times.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that's simple. Just program it to self-destruct and incinerate anything within a couple hundred yards in the event of unauthorized access. After the first few attempts, thieves would stay away.

 

[Deepak]

Well, that's simple. Just program it to self-destruct and incinerate anything within a couple hundred yards in the event of unauthorized access. After the first few attempts, thieves would stay away.

What if the thieves learn to use robots?

 

[Juma]

What's to stop these robot deliver vehicles from being hijacked?

Right now nothing. Hackers can hijack most late model GM cars through the OnStar system and cause them to accelerate or brake remotely no matter who is behind the wheel.

Not without physical access to the internal network. If you have that you can hack any car...

 

[Juma]

I hope google has auto liability insurance.

aa

There is an interesting dilemma with the automation software:

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/

The question boils down to: Do you get in a car that might be programmed to kill you?

Since any driver has the same dilemma And humans have much more unreliable reflexes I say: hell yes!

With the remark: when the technology is mature!

 

[TV and credit cards]

There is an interesting dilemma with the automation software:

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/

The question boils down to: Do you get in a car that might be programmed to kill you?

Minimize loss of life software will be necessary. There might be an override for the 1%. A button on the dash that reads: "Muckety-Muck Mode.