Hmm. The section on exemptions to safety standards was pretty interesting. I wonder what brought that on. The federal pre-emptions to state regulations was expected. States cannot have any higher standards than the federal ones, except for the vehicles that the states purchase for their own needs.
how come pre-emptions are expected? i would expect states cannot have any LOWER standards than federal (think min wage, emissions, etc) and can mandate higher if they choose
CA emissions have forced the automakers to offer basically two versions of every vehicle for the past half century or so. Nobody in the industry wants a repeat of that because it costs money.
One of the very few things that I see as a massive benefit of the current Trump Whitehouse: Now would be the time for moonshot projects! I bet Trump would be willing to free a massive budgets if under his term there were a realistic chance on something like the moonlanding. Or something that would ensure him a positive entry in the history books. I truly hople Thiel or Musk use this rare opportunity.
Tesla should make a car called the Model Trump, instant Federal support.
One of the very few things that I see as a massive benefit of the current Trump Whitehouse: Now would be the time for moonshot projects! I bet Trump would be willing to free a massive budgets if under his term there were a realistic chance on something like the moonlanding. Or something that would ensure him a positive entry in the history books. I truly hople Thiel or Musk use this rare opportunity.
Most presidents would, but they don't create the budget.
Not sure. It seems that most have other priorities. But its sometimes not about the budget but can be something like easing up certain laws and so on. Let's see if self driving cars are really normality until the end if his first term.
I doubt it. If my self driving Subaru causes an accident, I think Subaru will pay for the damages. And Subaru doesn't need to involve an insurance company in that transaction.
Volvo have already made it clear that they will take responsibility for incidents caused by autonomous Volvos. I presume that this is at least partly a marketing tool because I would certainly prefer a clear commitment on the part of the manufacturer of any autonomous car that I might buy.
Interesting. If that is a formal commitment, I imagine insuring a Volvo could be rather cheaper than some other cars.
> Advocates hope self-driving cars can help reduce U.S. road deaths, which rose 7.7 percent in 2015, the highest annual jump since 1966. This was a news story in itself [1]. It was attributed to increased driving, encouraged by economic factors such as higher employment and lower gas prices. [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/18/467230965/...
> attributed to increased driving, encouraged by economic factors such as higher employment and lower gas prices Interesting - I always assumed that the increase in road deaths was at least largely due to increased cellphone usage, resulting in distracted drivers.
UPS has 400,000 employees. Autonomous driving would pay itself off very quickly even if one of uber's cars personally murdered every single UPS and FedEx employee. Of course, the issue at play isn't joblessness, but the lack of a safety net for when people lose their jobs. Still, in the u.s., very few people actually starve to death, even when unemployed. Perhaps lack of health care will kill them all. But was their…
Staying with your parents isn't the idyllic life. I know from experience. /// Inb4 you want to held back technology. /// Technology's main focus should be improving peoples quality of living not maximizing profits and replacing employees with robots.
At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
Staying with your parents isn't the idyllic life. I know from experience. /// Inb4 you want to held back technology. /// Technology's main focus should be improving peoples quality of living not maximizing profits and replacing employees with robots.
Replacing employees is not the problem. In fact, it's a good thing. It frees people up to do more enjoyable things with their lives. The problem is that our economic system is unequipped to handle a world in which people aren't expected to work jobs "just because."
I make the argument that the majority of our interactions with law enforcement (for those of us who are otherwise generally well mannered) stem from some driving related instance. This is the true pathway for most of us to get tangled up in the [broken[ revolving door of the legal system. I am 100% all for self driving cars and look forward to owning one as soon as there are no controls for me to interact with at any time during travel. i.e. no steering wheel, no gas or brake pedals, nothing and therefore no reason to be pulled over. I want the car to be treated legally as an extension to my home; anything that I do / can do at home can also be done in the car. I want a cocktail? take it from the house into the car while it takes me to my destination.
On the one side - i find this quite extraordinary- a government ready to push new technologys, instead of inhibiting it- on the other (slightly paranoid) side- what is in it for the senators? Huge portions of traffic automated, because they really love new tech? Nah. They could have forwarded hyperloops and public traffic ages ago. Do they get a bonus point for the next vote? Certainly not, a large part of the popula…
If driving from one state to another, especially for business purposes, doesn't count as interstate commerce I don't know what does. See the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3): The United States Congress shall have power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."