CA to Issue Autonomous Car Licenses

[ARFlyer]

http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/22/ca...ng-licenses-for-driverless-cars-in-september/

This is interesting. It's the first step to full driverless cars.

Under the new program the cars will still have to have a "driver" for the first three years.

 

[frfly172]

Only in California ,go figure.

 

[nddons]

What could possibly go wrong.

 

[ARFlyer]

What could possibly go wrong.

Nothing as long as you don't call your car Christine....

 

[Palmpilot]

Only in California ,go figure.

I suspect that Google wants them to eventually be allowed where you live.

 

[John221us]

Only in California ,go figure.

It seems to be a way to regulate something that was already happening. The Google cars have been running around the Bay Area in CA for a while. I am guessing Nebraska doesn't need this law, yet, because Google isn't based there.

 

[Old97]

I know nothing about these, but I am really curious how the manufacturer deals with liability. I see so many ways for them to get sued.

 

[OkieFlyer]

Genius. Now we can do solo robberies. No need for untrustworthy henchmen to drive the getaway car! I shall name mine Kit.

 

[AuntPeggy]

drone cars?

 

[nddons]

I suspect that Google wants them to eventually be allowed where you live.

What Google wants, Google gets?

 

[Norman]

What could possibly go wrong.

"Hal, open the doors".

"Sorry Dave, I can't do that".

 

[ClimbnSink]

Do I need a license to operate my phone? How about my record player? No license, no state boot on the neck. Autonomous cars will bankrupt most states assuming all the cars either followed all the traffic laws or the owners couldn't be ticketed for the cars infraction. That said I would love an autonomous car, I no longer take any pleasure in driving.

 

[Palmpilot]

What Google wants, Google gets?

Sometimes it seems like it!

They certainly seem willing to invest time, resources, and money in making it happen.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

It can't be much worse that what passes for driver-occupied cars in CA already.

I want mine to have that bouncing red light in the hood, like KITT.

 

[RJM62]

What Google wants, Google gets?

It's interesting to speculate on how Google intends to make money with this technology.

-Rich

 

[Jim Logajan]

It's interesting to speculate on how Google intends to make money with this technology.

-Rich

Charge a license fee on the patented AI software. Simple and straightforward way to make money.

 

[ClimbnSink]

They already know your porn peferences when they drive your car they will also know where you dump your dead hookers.

 

[bnt83]

It can't be much worse that what passes for driver-occupied cars in CA already.

I want mine to have that bouncing red light in the hood, like KITT.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Charge a license fee on the patented AI software. Simple and straightforward way to make money.

I should have added links to stories about some of the patents that Google is assembling:

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/google-driverless-car-patent-uspto,news-15889.html

http://phandroid.com/2014/01/20/google-driverless-car-signal-recognition/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car

 

[Dav8or]

I know nothing about these, but I am really curious how the manufacturer deals with liability. I see so many ways for them to get sued.

Funny, I can't recall any utopian vision of the future including lawyers and lawsuits, can you? If the prime directive was to worry about liability, nothing new would ever be invented and put to market.

 

[flyingron]

 

[wsuffa]

Sometimes it seems like it!

They certainly seem willing to invest time, resources, and money in making it happen.

It's interesting to speculate on how Google intends to make money with this technology.

-Rich

You need to ask? So they track your every move & have screens in the car to sell ads. Speak the right words, and you'll end up in the parking lot of the advertiser. Not only a call to action, but creating the action itself!