71–80 of 300 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My biggest gripe is overreach. You start with sensible building codes, and eventually the city council is telling you what color bricks you have to use before they'll approve your plan. Yes this happens.
In, say a relatively historic area where all the buildings are the same, what is wrong with mandating brick colour?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My biggest gripe is overreach. You start with sensible building codes, and eventually the city council is telling you what color bricks you have to use before they'll approve your plan. Yes this happens.
In, say a relatively historic area where all the buildings are the same, what is wrong with mandating brick colour?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would say the majority of regulations (at least in > OECD countries) are sensible I think it can be shocking to non-Americans just how much the Americans distrust and think their lawmakers and -- especially shockingly, their civil servants -- are both incompetent and have malicious intent. American friends have found it incredible -- for example -- that something like NICE[0] can exist and people don't assume it'…
> I think it can be shocking to non-Americans just how much the Americans distrust and think their lawmakers and -- especially shockingly, their civil servants -- are both incompetent and have malicious intent. The EU is often criticized (e.g., Brexit) as being something that promulgates useless regulations (e.g., curvature of a banana).
> The EU is often criticized (e.g., Brexit) as being
> something that promulgates useless regulations
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My biggest gripe is overreach. You start with sensible building codes, and eventually the city council is telling you what color bricks you have to use before they'll approve your plan. Yes this happens.
In, say a relatively historic area where all the buildings are the same, what is wrong with mandating brick colour?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disagree with almost all of this. Liability should be with the owner of the car, like it mostly is today. They are the ones buying it and operating it on the public roads. They should have insurance to cover this liability.
I'm worried about the following: Hapless Joe buys a nice, well reviewed, good looking and performant self-driving car. He enjoys it very much for a year, goes for all the required maintenance checks. Then suddenly as he is taking a nap on his usual daily commute the car swerves onto the sidewalk and runs over my wife. Turns out there is a very rare race condition in the path finding algorithm, which makes it do that…
Once the car comes out of autonomous mode we can assign them some liability, depending on the situation.
I'm astounded that it seems like these regulations are going to be sensible and promote the technology. It's a good thing that these are going into place, since autonomous vehicles should definitely not be legislated on a state-by-state basis.
> I'm astounded that it seems like these regulations are going to be sensible... Was that hyperbole? I would say the majority of regulations (at least in OECD countries) are sensible, and many that are not are intended to be, are outdated, or are politicized.
Gun control is a great example that seems to confuse a lot of non-Americans. To your average San Franciscan, who has never used a gun and has no particular reason to use one, restrictions on e.g. magazine size probably seem quite reasonable. But go to an agrarian Texan rancher, and the situation is entirely different. Good luck thinning out a stampeding herd of wild hogs with a ten round fixed magazine. Similar situation with pot; the average SF resident is probably fairly familiar with it, whereas the rancher probably isn't. In either case, ignorance breeds irrational fear, which is a bad (but unfortunately likely) foundation for laws.
So yes, many regulations are not sensible, and it's harder to get away with in the US because the US isn't a monoculture. Even those regulations that are sensible (by whatever metric you like) are likely to anger some non-negligible group.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In, say a relatively historic area where all the buildings are the same, what is wrong with mandating brick colour?
I'd ask, in any area, why does your form trump my function?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people automatically assume a government can't make up sensible regulations. There are a lot of them in the US. It's a meme you hear all the time, especially in a POTUS election year.
I think it might be deeper than that. I don't feel that the US government, on it's own, is incapable of drafting up reasonable legislation. The problem is that the US government is 100% for sale to the highest bidder, and corruption runs deep (we just call it "campaign contributions" as if that makes it better). If sensible regulation is proposed, it'll last 30 seconds before the good senator from [some self-driving…
• Data Recording and Sharing
• Privacy
• System Safety
• Vehicle Cybersecurity
• Human Machine Interface
• Crashworthiness
• Consumer Education and Training
• Registration and Certi cation
• Post-Crash Behavior
• Federal, State and Local Laws
• Ethical Considerations
• Operational Design Domain (operating in rain, etc)
• Object and Event Detection and Response
• Fall Back (Minimal Risk Condition)
• Validation Methods
I'm astounded that it seems like these regulations are going to be sensible and promote the technology. It's a good thing that these are going into place, since autonomous vehicles should definitely not be legislated on a state-by-state basis.