California mulls how to regulate ‘driverless cars’
THE California Department of Motor Vehicles yesterday began to puzzle through the complex question of how to regulate cars that rely on computers — not people — to drive them.
Once the stuff of science fiction, “driverless cars” could be commercially available by decade’s end. Google already has sent its fleet of Priuses and Lexuses, fitted with an array of sensors, hundreds of thousands of miles in California, and major automakers are testing their own models.
The DMV has worked through rules governing how companies can test the technology, and those regulations could be finaliSed in the coming weeks.
On Tuesday, the agency held a public hearing to solicit ideas on how to integrate driverless cars — sometimes called “autonomous vehicles” — onto public roads.
Much of the initial discussion focused on privacy concerns.
California’s law requires autonomous vehicles to log records of operation so the data could be used to reconstruct an accident.
But the cars “must not become another way to track us in our daily lives,” John M Simpson of the non-profit Consumer Watchdog said at the hearing. Simpson called out Google, saying the Internet giant rebuffed attempts to add privacy guarantees when it pushed the 2012 legislation, which mandated rules on testing and public operation.
Seated across from Simpson at the hearing’s head tables was a representative from Google, who offered no comment on the data privacy issue.
Discussion s also touched on how to know a car is safe and whether an owner knows how to safely operate it. In initial iterations, human drivers would be expected to take control in an instant if the automated driving fails.
Ron Medford, Google’s director of safety for its “self-driving car” project, suggested that manufacturers should be able to self-certify that their cars are safe. He cautioned that it would get complicated, fast, if the state tried to assume that role.
DMV attorney, Brian Soublet, asked who would ensure that owners know how to use the new technology. Should the onus be on dealers, manufacturers or owners?