Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Saturday December 17 2016, @11:24PM   Printer-friendly
from the doesn't-anybody-drive-themself-anymore dept.

Uber, the master of routing around regulations and exploiting legal loopholes, has found a rather big hole undermining a letter recently sent by the California Department of Motor Vehicles demanding that the company obtain a permit to test "self-driving cars" in San Francisco. Uber is arguing that the cars it plans to use in San Francisco are not truly autonomous and thus don't require a permit to operate:

Uber's position is that the semi-autonomous car system it is testing here is really no different from current advanced driver assistance systems available now for owners of Teslas and other cars that help with parking and collision avoidance. In that light, Uber doesn't believe it needs a permit because what it's working on doesn't meet the DMV requirements for a truly autonomous vehicle, which would be one that drives without the active, physical control or monitoring of a human being.

The permitting process "doesn't apply to us" because "you don't need to get belts and suspenders or whatever else if you're wearing a dress," Anthony Levandowski, who runs Uber's autonomous car programs, said in a press call Friday afternoon. "We cannot in good conscience" comply with a regulation that the company doesn't believe applies to it, he said.

The DMV cease-and-desist letter said that under the California Vehicle Code, an autonomous vehicle must have a permit to ensure that "those testing the vehicle have provided an adequate level of financial responsibility, have adequately trained qualified test drivers on the safe operation of the autonomous technology; and will notify the DMV when the vehicles have been involved in a collision." If Uber does not confirm immediately that it will stop its launch and seek a testing permit, DMV will initiate legal action, DMV attorney Brian Soublet wrote in a letter addressed to Levandowski.

The Uber "self-driving cars" will have not one, but two people at the front capable of taking control of the car.

Previously: Uber to Begin Picking Up Passengers With Autonomous Cars Next Month
Former Uber Employee Claims Widespread Privacy Problems
Uber's Self-Driving Cars to be Tested in San Francisco


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 17 2016, @11:48PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 17 2016, @11:48PM (#442551)

    Have the passenger ride in the drivers seat, then you can claim the passenger is actually the driver. Require the passenger to have a drivers license, then you can deny service to undesirable bums who would otherwise want a ride because they cannot drive themselves. Classify the vehicle as a rental car instead of a taxi, then Uber wins.

  • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:10AM

    by isostatic (365) on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:10AM (#442556) Journal

    Ignoring the fact I'll often be uberring and not driving because I've had a drink, how would the cat get to where I am if it needed someone in the driver seat? Where would it go once I left the car?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:12AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:12AM (#442559)

      Why are you asking me?
      I'm just a stupid AC posting random shit to troll people.
      Duh!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:23AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:23AM (#442563)

        Or you could choose to read the comment in the context of the headline.

        Have the passenger of the self driving car ride in the drivers seat of the self driving car, then you can claim the passenger of the self driving car is actually the driver of the self driving car. Require the passenger of the self driving car to have a drivers license, then you can deny service to undesirable bums who would otherwise want a ride in a self driving car because they cannot drive themselves. Classify the self driving vehicle as a rental car instead of a taxi, then Uber wins at self driving cars.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @01:52AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @01:52AM (#442581)

          Or you could read the comments in the context that I am batshit because I forgot to take my meds this week.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @10:13AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @10:13AM (#442648)

            Or you could read the self-driving comments in the self-driving context that I am batshit because I forgot to take my self-driving meds this self-driving week.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:22PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:22PM (#442660)

              Yo dawg, I heard yo like self-driving comments so we put a self-driving context in yo self-driving comment so yo can self-drive while yo self-drive.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:36AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 18 2016, @12:36AM (#442565)

      An empty car can't travel alone so the AI driving the car will be made emotional and clingy and won't let you leave until it picks up its next passenger.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday December 18 2016, @03:02AM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday December 18 2016, @03:02AM (#442590) Homepage

        A Futurama episode [wikipedia.org] comes to mind.

        But self-driving cars, like space elevators, are an idea so batshit insane that people who think they're a good idea deserve Darwin Awards. Michael Hastings should have been a lesson to you all. Meaning people who get on a government's (or anybody else who knows the tech) shit-list will have their "self-driving" car hacked remotely and end up dying a horrific fiery death -- and never-mind the other bugs which already render these things unsafe.

        Frankly I'm amazed that critical systems within cars aren't air-gapped from all the other bells 'n' whistles bullshit and without wireless access. And my final rant about them is that, like riding a Segway, is a tacky and disgusting testament to human sloth. You can't wait until you get home to text and gobble that triple bacon cheeseburger with large curly-fries and 64 oz. soda while kneading your dick?

        " B-b-but MUH FALLING ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL. "

        Stop at a hotel then, you cheap fuck -- or smoke some meth and listen to Slayer.