SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Apple is building a self-driving car in Silicon Valley, and is scouting for secure locations in the San Francisco Bay area to test it, the Guardian has learned. Documents show the oft-rumoured Apple car project appears to be further along than many suspected.
In May, engineers from Apple’s secretive Special Project group met with officials from GoMentum Station, a 2,100-acre former naval base near San Francisco that is being turned into a high-security testing ground for autonomous vehicles.
In correspondence obtained by the Guardian under a public records act request, Apple engineer Frank Fearon wrote: “We would ... like to get an understanding of timing and availability for the space, and how we would need to coordinate around other parties who would be using [it].”
Automobile manufacturing is a radical departure from Apple's core business. Can they pull it off?
Original Submission
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday August 15 2015, @06:34PM
How many malicious anti-features will these (or Google's or any company's) self-driving cars include?
Initially not many at all.
They have a choice: Accept all liability and distract passengers, or foist all liability onto the driver, and prevent any distractions.
Initially, (given the current legal environment of law), I suspect they will lean more toward the latter. And as such they can't afford to do much beyond collecting statistics about trips. Nothing to distract the "responsible party".
The liability risk is simply too great, and if anything they built into the system contributed in any way to an accident it would cost them dearly.
Nothing that distracts the legally responsible operator (you) will be included in the vehicle.
Therefore, initial offerings will be very focused.
Only after years of use, (decades?), when they have influenced congress enough to escape all (or the bulk) of the liability issues, and simultaneously have weened drivers away from interfering with (er, *cough* taking control of) the driving, and have therefore freed up your attention from all vehicle monitoring tasks, will they be able to afford to compete for your eyeballs.
From then on, you are a captive audience. From then on they own every minute you spend in the vehicle.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Saturday August 15 2015, @06:55PM
You should stop thinking of these devices as "cars with optional autopilots" and instead as "fully roboticized taxis and limos." I guarantee you, Apple won't sell it with any user interface more direct than Siri. No steering wheel, no pedals, not even a joystick. Maybe a touchscreen, but only for the infotainment system, perhaps with an "advanced" mode that lets you tap your destination on a map. The chairs will likely swivel so those in front can turn and have a face-to-face conversation with those in the back. Probably even offer an option to black out or otherwise darken the windows so as to enhance the movie-watching experience.
Once people expect the cars to do the driving for them, they'll be no more capable of saving the car from a crash than any other passenger. Nobody's going to spend any time supervising the car's driving, any more than you already spend supervising the driver's driving. Anything the car could detect and warn somebody about to take control, the car could avoid in the first place without intervention. And the time to get somebody's attention, explain the problem, and elicit a reasonable response...yeah...not gonna happen.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday August 16 2015, @04:15AM
Maybe, but last weekend I was nearly hit by a red sedan with a SciFi type setup on it's roof. It ran a stop sign right in front of me. Fortunately I still have fast reactions, and even though there were skid marks, avoided collision. A magnetic sign on the door said "Apple Maps". I assumed it was it was out doing the same thing as google street view. A couple of days later I saw the same (or a similar) vehicle run a stop sign in a different part of town. This second car had no sign on it. There seemed to be an actual driver in each car.
After reading about the driverless car trials, I wonder if this was a test car. If so it needs a lot more work off of city streets. In any case I'm sure there will be some liability payments in Apple's future. And I'm kicking myself for reacting so fast. Probably could have gotten a newer SUV out of Apple.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 15 2015, @09:22PM
They have a choice: Accept all liability and distract passengers, or foist all liability onto the driver, and prevent any distractions.
Privacy invasions and the mere existence of proprietary software do not cause distractions. Neither does putting patents on everything, even the software. Or are you suggesting all software will be Free Software? If it's not, not only are your software freedoms infringed upon, but it is far more difficult to conclude with any high degree of probability that there are no backdoors and that it does not violate your privacy.
Furthermore, the government will be more than happy to ignore any of these problems (assuming it would even cause them to be liable as you say) if they could take a look at that data.