California Will Start Granting Licenses for Driverless Cars in September

Well it appears autonomous vehicles are starting to get serious. No, the robo-car will not be getting the license, but rather the human co-pilot. This seems to be the first push into getting them officially on public roads.

It's obviously very new so the average 'joe-shmoe' won't be able to apply just yet. Licenses will cost $150 and cover 10 vehicles and 20 humans (I can't help but laugh when typing that).

Some of the terms include:

-- Only designated employees of select autonomous vehicle manufacturers can apply

-- The car needs to be insured for at least $5,000,000 against personal injury, death, or property damage.

-- The test driver has to be able to take immediate control of the car at all times

-- The test driver must have been a licensed driver for at least 3 years, with no more than 1 point on their license, and no accidents that resulted in injuries. Anyone who’s had their license suspended in the past decade due to a DUI isn’t eligible.

-- Any accidents while operating the autonomous vehicle that result in damage or injury must be reported to the DMV within ten days.

Source

Also, if you're interested in viewing the California DMV licensing terms for this program, you can find it HERE

These are very interesting times as far as I'm concerned. It's been quite a while since there has been a massive change to the transportation system, and I think we're on the cusp of witnessing a new era.

For those of you who are still a bit iffy on the topic of autonomous vehicles, here is a picture which details some of the benefits...



If you cannot read it, click HERE and enlarge the image.

So what do you think ATS? Human error accounts for 90% of road accidents (source - one of many). Is it time for us to start embracing this mode of transportation?

As much as I DESPISE the idea of driverless cars, I have to concede that if, and its a big IF they can get the technology to safely interact on our roads with unpredictable human drivers it will have its benefits.

The elderly and disabled are the first groups that spring to mind.

a reply to: iamhobo im lazy as hell so yess do it but i wont be around them until 3-5 years after they show up just so the bugs have a chance to kill or mame someone else

I mean what could go wrong? Seems totally risk free. It's not like the computers in my life ever glitch or crash. Let's go to Vegas!

a reply to: markosity1973

Drunk drivers... im sure this will increase the amount of drunk test drivers.
Tho this wont please those who enjoy driving and the feeling of being the boss of the wheels.. when driveless cars will be mandatory there will be riots, similar to right to own guns

Even this might be a good idea but to many its a lobotomy a sort of.

originally posted by: dollukka
a reply to: markosity1973

Drunk drivers... im sure this will increase the amount of drunk test drivers.
Tho this wont please those who enjoy driving and the feeling of being the boss of the wheels.. when driveless cars will be mandatory there will be riots, similar to right to own guns

Even this might be a good idea but to many its a lobotomy a sort of.

I can't ever imagine driverless cars being mandatory due to the simple fact of the billions of cars without this tech in existence today.
,
Drunk driverless cars will just encourage new levels of stupidity among people. You'll end up seeing boozing parties on the road as the car is going along.

GPS tech will also have to improve big time. There are plenty of areas in outback australia where either the map does not accurately portray the roadway in relation to your actual coordinates and there are many gps dead spots too.

Because of the aforementioned problems alone, it will take years for this to work everywhere.

I can see a lot of time savings and safety coming after the technology has matured and is standard on all automobiles (including limited functionality retrofits for older cars).

For example, ever been at a four way stop or any intersection where some pokey geezer, someone not paying attention or even just clueless about rules and right of way, etc? Take the slow, scared and/or stupid human out of the equation and keep traffic flowing!

In times of accidents - especially during night or hazardous fog, ice, etc - instead of a 50 car pile up, or some unaware driver going the speed limit but slamming into you because they couldn't see you broke down, stuck etc - a pleasing voice informs you "the central system registers a traffic hazard 2.3 miles ahead, all traffic slowing automatically until past the event, traffic with reroute options automatically re routed, and emergency vehicles notified and already on the way to the scene at max speed in the emergency access lane."

The future of GPS - and sure beats sitting in traffic wondering what is going on while traffic slows to a halt because of mindless rubber neckers straining to try to get a glimpse of some gore as its their turn to pass by an accident. Keep it moving. The lives it saves from victims of road rage makes it worthwhile IMO (not to mention hopefully preventing my descent into road rage!). :-)

They'll invent a machine to take care of your old lady for you next......
Humans will do anything to abrogate themselves from responsibility.....good luck wit dat.........

if I was going to have a car that drives itself you can damn sure I will setup a poker table and a bar in it.

Anybody thinking of "I Robot" here?



ETA: Or maybe just me watching movies too much...but it IS based off of Asimov's thoughts years ago...

Kind of freaks me out that someday cars may drive us to where "someone" wants us to, instead of where WE want to.

a reply to: markosity1973

except you wouldnt see "boozing parites on the road as the car is going along"

because it will be required that the driver retain the ability to take control at all times (i can damn well guarantee you that law will apply when the vehicles make it to mass market as well)
so the same intoxication laws that apply today would apply to the "driverless cars" as well

the real benefits of the technology will be due to accident prediction and avoidance (ex. the car will be able to sense things happening in a fairly wide radius around it and be able to predict an accident thats about to occur further ahead)

Why not?They already gave licenses ro illegals?

This seems stupid to me. The reason I have a license is so I can drive a car. If the car is driving itself then why the hell does the passenger need a special license??? I mean that is the whole point isn't it???

In fact, it removes all the benefits for having the damn thing in the first place. Get drunk and have the car drive you home safe. Stick the kids in it and have it drive them to school or to grandmas or whatever. Take a nap and let the car drive you across the state or wherever.

If I have to get a license to babysit the damn thing and can't enjoy the fact that I'm not driving, then why the hell would I get one??? It doesn't make sense. If I'm alert and ready to take control at any moment then I'm still driving. You'd be better off just hiring a driver.

a reply to: mOjOm

humans are limited in what they can perceive on the road for any number of factors
these cars would certainly make your ride safer even if you drove manually 99% of the time

a reply to: iamhobo



This will help the elderly,mentally and physically disabled the most I believe. We will not see them mandatory in my lifetime but I believe we will see systems put in place to take over to avoid accidents.

I want everyone to have their own pod, I created a design let me know whatcha think Piezoelectric, Tire, Road System, Water Electrolysis based fuel battery

a reply to: sirhumperdink

That's fine. I'm not saying to NOT have them. I'm saying, if you're going to have them, then let them serve in all the ways they are helpful. Let them Drive us home if we're drunk. Let them drive us while we sleep, or watch TV or play cards. I mean they're safe to let them drive, so let them drive. Otherwise what's the point.

I actually am starting to realize the point though. These aren't about helping the common man and they certainly aren't about safety either. If auto makers were concerned with your safety they wouldn't be getting busted for not recalling cars that are killing people because they're too cheap to change faulty ignitions for 18 cents.

a reply to: mOjOm

dude these could potentially prevent most accidents that occur
i dont know why that pisses you off so much
hell insurance would go down you could even make a pretty good case for getting rid of it entirely

you know as well as i do (or should)
that these things would eventually cost about the same as cars do now (the cost for making it autonomous not including dev costs should be negligible)

i dont care how many of you consider yourselves good drivers there are just as many bad drivers out there and i would be pleased as pudding when some jackass who wasnt paying attention and sped through an intersection without looking was stopped by his car before plowing into me

Ok, this is going to get deep into the conspiracy theory angle of things here. This is what the Paranoid Conspiracy Theory side of me is predicting about this whole Driverless Car idea. Hold on to your Hat's. Tinfoil and otherwise.

Let's jump in the old Time machine and hop to the near future shall we.

Cars drive themselves now and have been for some time. The license to operate them are sold like is mentioned in the OP in a bulk type way. Meaning the average man on the street is still driving manually. (I'll provide the real reason for that shortly.)

Big Business however, now has fleets of driverless vehicles removing the need for qualified drivers. So long Truck Drivers, you are no longer needed, nor are any delivery drivers of any kind. Replaced by any simpleton who can be paid the lowest possible wage to simply babysit the car as it drives around. Then probably removed a short time after that even.

The roads will have to be maintained and will be separated into "Business Roads" and "Common Roads". Driverless on the Business ones and everyone else on the Common ones. Common roads will be "Pay as you go" toll roads, further taxing the common man and limiting their travel. Thru manipulation and corruption the toll's will go first to "Business Roads" to keep the supplies coming and going of course, although that will be hidden as much as possible. Common roads will suck and be horribly maintained, but for those who can afford it, they will travel the Driverless roads which are nice and paid for by the toll's and by Corporations. Corporations will cheat at this too obviously.

So Big business and those who run them at this point:
Will eliminate yet another job market.
Suck more money from the common man making him poorer and themselves richer.
Enjoy all the perks of Driverless Cars on well kept, safer roads where they can drink, or sleep, or hump while the car drives.
Still get their products delivered without having to pay someone to do it for them.
Separate themselves even further from having to deal with anyone below their High Class Lifestyles.
etc....

Anyone else have anything to add???

No need to respond with telling me I'm crazy or paranoid either, cause I already said at the start I was well aware of that, thank you!

But think about it. Tell me it's NOT going to go something similar to what I just said??? At least this is now public record if it does. Maybe in the future I'll be thought of as a modern day prophet??

a reply to: sirhumperdink

Who said I was pissed???

Once again, I'm not saying they are a bad idea. I'm saying that having to have someone babysit them while they drive is just dumb. Why not allow them to drive the person home even if they aren't alert and monitoring the vehicle???

After all, if it's supposed to help the elderly who can't drive on their own then it doesn't make much sense to require an "Alert, Licensed Driver/Monitor" to be in control of it. If you have that, then they can just drive the elderly or anyone else not able to drive themselves.

The whole point is to let the car drive anyone regardless of their condition. It's the limits and license I have a problem with, not the vehicles or the Technology itself..