Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 376 posts

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#341

Post by Dylan16807 »

nobody9999 wrote: post #259
belval wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or am I missing something important? We absolutely want to remotely control cars at some point, how else will you send a self-driving taxi to a customers or "ask" a car to comeback to the garage for a recall on the underlying hardware or for general maintenance?

>We absolutely want to remotely control cars at some point, how else will you send a self-driving taxi to a customers or "ask" a car to comeback to the garage for a recall on the underlying hardware or for general maintenance? Who is this "we"? You might, but I don't. That's a disaster waiting to happen. What's more, under the circumstances you describe, there's no reason such vehicles need to be internet accessible.…

> > remotely control cars

> What's more, under the circumstances you describe, there's no reason such vehicles need to be internet accessible. Or have we forgotten that communication doesn't require the internet?

What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet?

Text messages?

Special short range base stations with 56k modems?

Satellite phone?

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#342

Post by ClumsyPilot »

young_unixer wrote: post #309
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the driver know reliability of closed-source, ai based autonomous system is the manufacturer himself doesn't?

They don't, so they shouldn't use it.

Take your statement and replace 'driver' with 'manufacturer' or 'retailer', and we can have a deal.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#343

Post by nobody9999 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #341
nobody9999 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We absolutely want to remotely control cars at some point, how else will you send a self-driving taxi to a customers or "ask" a car to comeback to the garage for a recall on the underlying hardware or for general maintenance? Who is this "we"? You might, but I don't. That's a disaster waiting to happen. What's more, under the circumstances you describe, there's no reason such vehicles need to be internet accessible.…

> > remotely control cars > What's more, under the circumstances you describe, there's no reason such vehicles need to be internet accessible. Or have we forgotten that communication doesn't require the internet? What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet? Text messages? Special short range base stations with 56k modems? Satellite phone?

>What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet?

Pretty much any low power radio application (CB/HAM radio, key fobs, walkie talkies, POTS lines and dozens more), or higher power (although those require FCC licenses) don't require the internet.

Besides, I'm referring to the software that makes the vehicle operate. That software/system should never be exposed to remote sources. Otherwise, you're pretty much begging to be locked in your car and taken on a joyride which ends with you rolling off a cliff.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#344

Post by nobody9999 »

tshaddox wrote: post #302
nobody9999 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Again, it is a choice, and the fact that you choose the better option doesn't mean it's not a choice. What's the choice? I don't have any idea what you mean

The choice is to stay at home, where you are very unlikely to get in a car accident, or to drive a car, which greatly increased the risk of accident and death.

>The choice is to stay at home, where you are very unlikely to get in a car accident, or to drive a car, which greatly increased the risk of accident and death.

Absolutely. At least until you're fired from your job because you don't show up. Then you'll (depending on where you live) a few months to maintain that "choice" before the landlord throws you out on your ass because you "chose" not to go to work.

Please.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#345

Post by yazaddaruvala »

dane-pgp wrote: post #294
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it kind of does. I do agree tho, “no steering wheel, no responsibility” should be explicit in law.

Presumably you mean "no responsibility for the owner", and the responsibility should be borne by the manufacturer. I'm not sure if that's the right set of incentives for society, though. If the owner is responsible for any deaths caused by their car, the owner will have an incentive to choose a car that has a good safety record, and to keep that car in proper working order. Conversely, if a corporation is responsible…

> no responsibility for the owner

Well, I meant “no responsibility for the passengers”.

The owner should have some limited liability as you say, but primarily liability should be with the manufacturer. The way I view it AVs should have similar liability as an elevator. The manufacturer and the maintainer should have liability, but never the passengers.

Ideally, the manufacturer keeps enough sensors on the thing such that the car doesn’t move without the proper maintenance. But at that point is it truly ownership?

My preference is to just have many services competing that make them relatively cheap.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#346

Post by Dylan16807 »

nobody9999 wrote: post #343
Dylan16807 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > remotely control cars > What's more, under the circumstances you describe, there's no reason such vehicles need to be internet accessible. Or have we forgotten that communication doesn't require the internet? What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet? Text messages? Special short range base stations with 56k modems? Satellite phone?

>What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet? Pretty much any low power radio application (CB/HAM radio, key fobs, walkie talkies, POTS lines and dozens more), or higher power (although those require FCC licenses) don't require the internet. Besides, I'm referring to the software that makes the vehicle operate. That software/system should never be exposed to remote sources. Otherwise, yo…

Your car is not going to have a Ham license, and I already mentioned POTS; do you really think having your car sit close to a special phone-based communication station is the answer? Key fobs and walkie talkies and LoRaWAN do not have enough range to fully enable this kind of use.

> Otherwise, you're pretty much begging to be locked in your car and taken on a joyride which ends with you rolling off a cliff.

If hacks while driving are your concern, you could have the car isolate from the internet when the key is inside it and/or someone hits a stop button. If hacks before driving are your concern, I don't think any of your suggested radio applications are safe either. And I don't really see why half of them are better than an internet connection in the first place.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#347

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

Communitivity wrote: post #120

This is problematic for a number of reasons. The most important in my mind is that the risk of the vehicle being hacked and carjacked remotely is always present. With the presence of an automation kill-switch and manual human controls the driver can always take back control. Without those, the driver is at the mercy of the hacker. Vehicle automation falls under the SCADA sub-domain of cyber-security. SCADA stands for…

well kind of. Since elons been toying around with the Yoke, Tesla's been working with a steering wheel that has no real relation to a physical mechanism and will be software based. This would still allow for haptic feedback and will make the e'Yoke' usable, but you never having to turn your wheel past 45* for full turn radius.

You could theoritically still hack that.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#348

Post by nobody9999 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #346
nobody9999 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What kind of remote communication these days doesn't require the internet? Pretty much any low power radio application (CB/HAM radio, key fobs, walkie talkies, POTS lines and dozens more), or higher power (although those require FCC licenses) don't require the internet. Besides, I'm referring to the software that makes the vehicle operate. That software/system should never be exposed to remote sources. Otherwise, yo…

Your car is not going to have a Ham license, and I already mentioned POTS; do you really think having your car sit close to a special phone-based communication station is the answer? Key fobs and walkie talkies and LoRaWAN do not have enough range to fully enable this kind of use. > Otherwise, you're pretty much begging to be locked in your car and taken on a joyride which ends with you rolling off a cliff. If hacks…

>I don't think any of your suggested radio applications are safe either. And I don't really see why half of them are better than an internet connection in the first place.

The difference is that there aren't 25,000 (conservative estimate) people looking to hack/scam/destroy stuff on local radio channels.

Which means that someone would need to target me specificly, not run across the poor/no security on the internet link from my car while scanning the 'net.

Besides, the car proper (ICE/electric motor, steering, brakes, etc.) and the software that runs it shouldn't be accesible by anyone unless they have both physical access to the car and a reasonable amount of security (key fob, password, etc.) to be allowed to muck around with the car's operating software.

Infotainment systems, sure. But those need to be on separate, air-gapped hardware.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#349

Post by ben_w »

simion314 wrote: post #172
ben_w wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way it’s impossible in principle is if human intelligence (and a lot of non human animal intelligence) is due to some potent non-physical substance of thought which can never be made by any work of artifice on the physical plane, AKA a soul. Absent souls, human drivers are existence proof that minds made of matter can drive cars. That doesn’t stop being true even if the current preferred architecture is all…

>The only way it’s impossible in principle is if human intelligence (and a lot of non human animal intelligence) is due to some potent non-physical substance of thought which can never be made by any work of artifice on the physical plane, AKA a soul. So I was thinking "eventually" as somewhat in next 100 years, otherwise even if you need a soul you could say shit like "eventually we will evolve to the next plane and…

I think you may be underestimating the rate of progress — 100 years ago, transistors were hypothetical, now we have made more of them than there are stars in our past light cone, and they are smaller and faster than synapses to the degree to which wolves are smaller than hills and move further per day than continental drift.

IMO we will probably hit the single-atom limit in consumer devices this decade, though researchers are already suggesting multiple q-bits in a single atom so perhaps we won’t even stop when we get 1Å process chips.

The main limiting factor right now is that we don’t really understand the structure of our intelligence. If you will permit an analogy: perceptrons and convolution kernels are like bricks, while current brain scans (MRI, EEG, etc.) are like nighttime satellite photos of city lights — we’ve got a gap in the middle that would tell us we need steel reinforced concrete to make skyscrapers and why want to build them in the first place.

Re: U.S. eliminates human controls requirement for fully automated vehicles

#350

Post by NullPrefix »

christophilus wrote: post #223
jedberg wrote: post #220

I think a lot of people are misreading this. Right now one of the rules to pass a crash test is that there is a steering wheel. This didn't used to be controversial, but now it is. The rules were written in the 70s and just assumed there would always be a drivers seat. The only thing here is that the government rewrote the rules to no longer assume those things. It's not saying those things aren't necessary, just not…

> It would be like saying today that you can't have a computer without an on/off switch because in the 70s every computer had a physical switch. As aside, that’d be great.

Always-ON computer?
Post reply on HN