Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the Carriageway-Dodgems dept.

The UK government is to permit driverless cars on the roads by next year.

The UK government is to outline measures to permit driverless cars to use public roads by next year.

Currently, autonomous vehicles are only allowed on private roads.

The Department for Transport had previously pledged to allow self-driving cars to be trialled on public roads by the end of 2013.

In December, the Treasury said it would create a £10m prize to fund a town or city to become a testing ground for the cars.

The government wants to signal that Britain can be a leader in such technology, and Business Secretary Vince Cable will announce measures to boost research later.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by present_arms on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:16PM

    by present_arms (4392) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:16PM (#75527) Homepage Journal

    To the editors, I also submitted this story, please feel free to remove it :D

    --
    http://trinity.mypclinuxos.com/
  • (Score: 1) by ThG on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:27PM

    by ThG (4568) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:27PM (#75534)

    When such a driverless car happens to cause a car accident due to, for example, a software error.. Who is responsible? The manufacturer? The owner? Nobody at all?
    I'd expect that the manufacturer can be sued for this, but can we really expect them to produce error-prone software when even the NASA can't guarantee this and their stuff is a whole lot more expensive.

    • (Score: 2) by tibman on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:35PM

      by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:35PM (#75538)

      I suppose you could blame the car but the owner's insurance would pay out the damages. Where i live there is "no fault" in an accident unless the police charge you with something (DUI, speeding). Just exchange details and go home (hopefully the vehicles are still drivable). The insurance companies will figure out who will pay by asking both drivers questions (oh, that could get interesting with a driverless car). They write it up like "at fault 50% or more" but it doesn't affect you. Should be interesting to read articles about how accidents are handled : )

      --
      SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
      • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:39PM

        by Buck Feta (958) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @02:39PM (#75541) Journal

        > the owner's insurance would pay out the damages

        Can anyone point to an insurance company which will insure a driverless car? How do premiums compare to rate for traditional vehicles?

        --
        - fractious political commentary goes here -
        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Rivenaleem on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:15PM

          by Rivenaleem (3400) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:15PM (#75554)

          An insurance company will look at the data from Google's trials, from the Manufacturer's trials, and determine that they are less likely to cause a crash than a human driver. They will then crunch the numbers, and determine they could give a driver-less car a premium that was 10% of a human, but in fact offer 60% of a human driver and make 50% profit.

          • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:44PM

            by Buck Feta (958) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:44PM (#75565) Journal

            Perhaps, but I'm asking if there are currently any companies offering insurance.

            --
            - fractious political commentary goes here -
            • (Score: 2) by fnj on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:32PM

              by fnj (1654) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:32PM (#75604)

              Clearly there is no one here with a single iota of substantive information on the answer to your question, but they are all cocksure they know exactly what the universal policy is going to be.

            • (Score: 2) by mrider on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:49PM

              by mrider (3252) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:49PM (#75611)

              Are there any companies currently producing autonomous cars? Because it's unlikely one will find insurance for non-existent products.

              --

              Doctor: "Do you hear voices?"

              Me: "Only when my bluetooth is charged."

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @11:39PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @11:39PM (#75747)

                This is not a non-existent product.

                • (Score: 1) by Flyingmoose on Thursday July 31 2014, @12:43AM

                  by Flyingmoose (4369) <mooseNO@SPAMflyingmoose.com> on Thursday July 31 2014, @12:43AM (#75759) Homepage

                  Product implies that I can buy one, but there are only prototypes.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31 2014, @04:20AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31 2014, @04:20AM (#75789)

                    Cars driving on public roads need insurance, whether *you* can buy one or not.

                    • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday July 31 2014, @12:59PM

                      by urza9814 (3954) on Thursday July 31 2014, @12:59PM (#75890) Journal

                      Cars driving on public roads need insurance, whether *you* can buy one or not.

                      And I'm sure they have insurance, whether *you* can buy it or not. You really think someone like Google can't get an insurance company to write up a one-off legal minimum car insurance policy? Just look at all the crazy crap the guys on Mythbusters manage to get insured. If they can write up a policy for playing tennis on an airplane wing strapped to the back of a speeding pickup truck, I'm sure they can write up a policy for a car with autopilot.

                      It's a prototype product, and it needs prototype insurance. So what? There will surely be mass-market insurance once these things are mass-market products.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @04:25PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 30 2014, @04:25PM (#75581)

            +1! This is exactly what will happen.

      • (Score: 2) by fnj on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:28PM

        by fnj (1654) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:28PM (#75603)

        Where i live there is "no fault" in an accident unless the police charge you with something (DUI, speeding).

        And maybe vehicular homicide when you bowl over some hapless pedestrian or cyclist in you vehicle, driverless or not?

        • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday July 31 2014, @01:05PM

          by urza9814 (3954) on Thursday July 31 2014, @01:05PM (#75893) Journal

          Where i live there is "no fault" in an accident unless the police charge you with something (DUI, speeding).

          And maybe vehicular homicide when you bowl over some hapless pedestrian or cyclist in you vehicle, driverless or not?

          My car just had a recall for faulty breaks. They sent me a helpful letter saying not to worry about anything, they don't have parts to fix it, but they'll let me know when they do. So, if the breaks fail between now and then and I run someone down, who's at fault? How is faulty breaks any different from faulty software?

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Rivenaleem on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:11PM

      by Rivenaleem (3400) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:11PM (#75550)

      When a car happens to cause an accident due to, for example, a faulty mechanical component... Who is responsible?

      The car does not have to be error prone, it just has to be better than Human drivers. This is not going to be hard.

      I got a new bike recently, and a friend was looking at it and made a critical comment on the pedals. I explained that the day my cycling performance hinges on the quality of the pedals, I'll make sure to do something about it.

      The day that largest contributor to road deaths/accidents are software problems and not because of human drivers, we can look at this question.

      • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:24PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:24PM (#75555)

        > The day that largest contributor to road deaths/accidents are software problems and not because of human drivers, we can look at this question.

        Tell that to the parents of the kids who keep accumulating under my shiny autonomous car's bumper.
        (I know detecting humans is actually the highest area of focus, but I'm pointing out the over-simplification in your comment)

        • (Score: 5, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:56PM

          by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:56PM (#75572) Journal

          > Tell that to the parents of the kids who keep accumulating under my shiny autonomous car's bumper. (I know detecting humans is actually the highest area of focus,

          Detecting them isn't the hard part, it's hitting them even after they start dodging behind parked cars, walls etc. Have you tried mounting a google-controlled automatic minigun on your car?

      • (Score: 2) by compro01 on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:44PM

        by compro01 (2515) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @03:44PM (#75563)

        I got a new bike recently, and a friend was looking at it and made a critical comment on the pedals. I explained that the day my cycling performance hinges on the quality of the pedals, I'll make sure to do something about it.

        The pedals are one of the higher consequence points of failure. Having a pedal break/break off could be rather injurious, especially in a high-load situation.

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:36PM

          by frojack (1554) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:36PM (#75605) Journal

          Even after quoting him, you missed his point.
          He's a leisurely rider, and probably never stands upon the pedals.

          (Never the less, platform pedals don't need to break to cause minor accidents).

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Wednesday July 30 2014, @10:03PM

          by Rivenaleem (3400) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @10:03PM (#75723)

          The bike came with basket peddles, and I specifically changed them out for plane old flat peddles, because I do all of my cycling in the city and stop regularly at lights and such (shock, I know!) A week after I got the bike the left crank came loose (it hadn't been fitted tight enough in the factory) and rotated through 90 degrees when I was pulling off into traffic (onto a roundabout). Thankfully my feet were not strapped into the peddles or I would have come off the bike, instead I was able to put my toe on the ground, stabilise myself and roll to the side of the road.

          If I was doing a lot of long distance cycling I'd get cleats or egg-beaters. For commuting, though, basic flat peddles are perfectly fine.

    • (Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Wednesday July 30 2014, @04:51PM

      by Vanderhoth (61) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @04:51PM (#75590)

      "When such a driverless car happens to cause a car accident due to, for example, a software error.. Who is responsible?"

      The answer to this is exactly how it works now. If the part is faulty because of manufacture defect then it's the manufacture (ford, GM, Toyota, etc...) if the part is faulty because of owner neglect, "That engine light has been on for 10 years now, I didn't know it meant I should take my car in for servicing", then it's the owners fault.

      Most of the questions people ask related to insurance for driveless cars boil down to, How is it done now? continue doing that. I imagine cars will still be insured even when all cars are driverless and accident rates are 1%. Insurance, in most places, is a legal requirement even if a person has been driving for 25+ years without so much as a scratch proving they're a good driver and most likely aren't going to be the ones at fault in an accident... Same as driverless cars.

      If there's a software error with the default it's 100% the manufacture responsibility, same as if there were faulty breaks installed in the car. If the owner was mucking around and hacking the software for whatever reason, it's the owners fault. It would be pretty easy to tell.

      --
      "Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:26PM

      by frojack (1554) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @05:26PM (#75602) Journal

      When such a driverless car happens to cause a car accident due to, for example, a software error.. Who is responsible? The manufacturer? The owner? Nobody at all?

      This again?

      Haven't we beaten this horse pretty much to death?

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:11PM

        by Vanderhoth (61) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @06:11PM (#75624)

        I have to agree, every time there's a driverless car article this comes up. The answer is so obvious all I can think is the people asking the question are purposely being obtuse to make it seem like it's going to be some issue that's going to prevent the technology from catching on. Because you know as soon as the technology is shown to be better/safer than human drivers, it'll be mandatory and illegal for people to drive manually. Maybe not all at once, but I think it's not far off.

        --
        "Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
        • (Score: 2) by Common Joe on Thursday July 31 2014, @05:13AM

          by Common Joe (33) <{common.joe.0101} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday July 31 2014, @05:13AM (#75800) Journal

          The answer is (mostly) obvious to people like you and me, but reality usually takes a different path. Those who keep asking the questions get no answers from those who make the laws and from those who insure us. That's why people keep asking. For instance, it's amazing that streaming TV and movies over the Internet is such a big deal. Streaming is basic computer technology and we still can't get the stuff [theoatmeal.com] right. It's obvious what should happen, but it doesn't.

          Now, I think you're right. Driverless technology will eventually be mandatory, but I don't think it will be in the next few years. Here's a Soylent News story [soylentnews.org] from three days ago that says it will be a while before the technology is mature enough. That is the first time I saw anything about driving within a city. People keep asking these questions because all the news agencies kept reporting how great and mature the technology was, but I never heard anything about them test driving through New York City or Houston or L.A. I kept thinking, "They've got to be babying the technology in easy-to-drive scenarios because they never brag about the scenarios I want to hear about." Apparently, I was right.

          Like you, I know I'm getting tired of hearing these same questions being asked, but until I see answers, I want them to continue to be asked. We're getting to a point where these questions should begin to be addressed by the big boys. In my experience, not seeing these basic questions answered (or even acknowledged) by those in power usually means bad news. If you have any link where politicians or insurance agencies actually address these questions with real answers, I would love to see it.

        • (Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Thursday July 31 2014, @04:29PM

          by BasilBrush (3994) on Thursday July 31 2014, @04:29PM (#75976)

          Because you know as soon as the technology is shown to be better/safer than human drivers, it'll be mandatory and illegal for people to drive manually.

          If it's a lot safer, sure. But the way these things are usually done is standards on new vehicles. So there would, after a period of time, be only autonomous vehicles available. But if you wanted to drive manually, you'd just buy a used car.

          Eventually of course manual used cars will be impossible to come by. But we'll be long dead before then.

          --
          Hurrah! Quoting works now!
    • (Score: 2) by Blackmoore on Wednesday July 30 2014, @07:18PM

      by Blackmoore (57) on Wednesday July 30 2014, @07:18PM (#75644) Journal

      And who's responsible if the car's software has been hacked, and the damn thing is now hunting people?

      I'm just asking for a friend..