bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
My understanding is that this bill is scheduled to die in lame duck.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Ohio Bill to Ban/Fine Self-driving Cars on Ohio Roads
- Thread starter supratachophobia
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ban fine Model S self-driving
reynirb
Member
So what about cars with adaptive cruise control. What if you car has adaptive cruise and lane departure warning system?
I drove an Acura TLX a few months back that follows the lines in the road and steers itself, is it also banned?
I see them opening up a can of worms where pretty much any car with adaptive cruise and auto braking/steering is banned from Ohio if this law is passed.
Besides, how exactly would they know you used an automatic system and prove it in court. I have tinted windows, I would love to hear the officer explain how he knew what exactly I was doing at any given time.
I drove an Acura TLX a few months back that follows the lines in the road and steers itself, is it also banned?
I see them opening up a can of worms where pretty much any car with adaptive cruise and auto braking/steering is banned from Ohio if this law is passed.
Besides, how exactly would they know you used an automatic system and prove it in court. I have tinted windows, I would love to hear the officer explain how he knew what exactly I was doing at any given time.
And what exactly do you think the legislation proposed in Ohio is???Don't worry, if Hillary wins, she's all for more gov regulation and control.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
You don't do politics much, do you ?
This is a faintly veiled attack to avoid competing with the M3
It's possible we'll see some laws passed or regulations implemented about "full self driving" cars operating in "driver assist" mode, in what is essentially an open beta test of the new full self driving hardware and software.
A valid concern is that all drivers may not be trusted to properly monitor the cars when they are essentially driving themselves - and won't be able to act quickly enough to override bugs in the FSD hardware/software that could cause an accident.
So far, this hasn't been a major problem for Tesla, though as the software and hardware begin to drive more on surface streets, which are more complicated than highways, the risks increase. And if drivers become complacent, assuming the software always makes the right decisions, there could be an increased risk of accidents.
We should expect Tesla will continue to do what they can to ensure drivers are in control of the cars when operating in "driver assist" mode. Besides the steering wheel nags - Tesla could do what other manufacturers have already done - add a driver facing camera, and make sure the driver is actually watching the road.
A valid concern is that all drivers may not be trusted to properly monitor the cars when they are essentially driving themselves - and won't be able to act quickly enough to override bugs in the FSD hardware/software that could cause an accident.
So far, this hasn't been a major problem for Tesla, though as the software and hardware begin to drive more on surface streets, which are more complicated than highways, the risks increase. And if drivers become complacent, assuming the software always makes the right decisions, there could be an increased risk of accidents.
We should expect Tesla will continue to do what they can to ensure drivers are in control of the cars when operating in "driver assist" mode. Besides the steering wheel nags - Tesla could do what other manufacturers have already done - add a driver facing camera, and make sure the driver is actually watching the road.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
What do you call texting while driving ? Or chatting on the phone, for that matter.
I think it is an unanswered question which is safer: a chatting, "in full control" driver of today or a chatting, "Auto driver" car of tomorrow.
The notion that a L5 car must reach the standard of a proficient, highly trained, and careful, fully focused driver of today is a straw man argument and extra-ordinarily perverse barrier of entry because the average driver is anything but. I'll bet you a lot of money that that an L5 car has a perfect passing rate on a driver's license practical exam, and let's be honest: few people drive anywhere near as well after they pocket the license.
Last edited:
I was quoted the same thing by someone who deals with the system everyday. But it's extremely disturbing that it was proposed in its current wording and by a person with clear conflicts of interest. I wanted to be very clear in my opposition to the ignorance and do my best to be vigilant that something like this doesn't sneak past us.
Tesla AP1 is not safe. The bill was written ambiguously on purpose so that APv1 could be affected if interpreted a certain way.
I found it interesting that this bill is designed to be a part of the no texting while driving law, same section.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
No argument, whatsoever. I just wanted to make sure that people knew this wasn't a 'draw a line in the sand and FIGHT' kind of thing. But totally let the legislature know how slimey the action was to begin with.
Cooksomerice
Member
Does anyone have any information regarding Tesla's policy efforts in Ohio?
I am interested to see how they respond to this news.
Stands to reason that AP drivers/early adopters should create PAC, apart from any efforts by tesla, to educate and help shape the inevitable wave of legislation affecting the technology.
I am interested to see how they respond to this news.
Stands to reason that AP drivers/early adopters should create PAC, apart from any efforts by tesla, to educate and help shape the inevitable wave of legislation affecting the technology.
I'm in for this. My understanding is that Tesla has their 3 stores and they are just trying to coast in Ohio until they can focus their attention there. The Cleveland store is really beat up at times from all the Michigan service and deliveries they have to do. that isn't sustainable so Michigan is a big priority right now.
I do know that Fred from Electrek hasn't gotten back to me yet on doing an article. I would think this would be a big deal even in its humble beginnings. The conversation is starting in earnest and we clearly know that auto dealers in politics are not above those conflicts of interest when it comes to singling out Tesla in bills like this.
KublaConn
Member
Maybe I missed an announcement somewhere, but exactly when was the claim made that the driver won't be responsible for the operation of a Tesla that has AP 2.0? It's attitudes and thought processes like the one you're displaying here that are helping to inspire legislators to write up bills like this one. The driver is always responsible for the operation of their vehicle, AP is driver assistance, not fully autonomous driving. We are years, if not possibly a decade, away from fully-autonomous driving being a legal, common practice on public roads and if people continue to treat emerging driver-assistance technology as responsibility-absolving features, it will only serve to delay even further that day's arrival. Mis-use of the technology by users who are misguided, at best, in their expectations as to the capabilities and intentions of these features will only cause more fear and misunderstanding among the general population. When Elon Musk talks about AP, he mentions "depending on legal issues and government regulations", well, what do you think this is right here, that we're talking about? This is how the "legal issues & government regulations" part of it works, it starts with individual state officials proposing bills. The technology won't necessarily be the limiting factor in the move to fully autonomous driving, it will be a hard fought battle against public perception and heavily-vested special interest groups and that doesn't happen overnight. Please, I beseech you, please stop saying things like "where the driver is not responsible for the operation of the vehicle", it's not helping things...at all. We are not even close to that point, and it will most likely take much more than changing the vehicle itself, but rather, changes to the transportation infrastructure as well, before we get there.
For what it's worth, the bill specifically outlines that the person who is responsible is the one who engaged self driving. Which would be assumed to be the driver.
KublaConn
Member
Yes, and it's people who make claims that the driver isn't responsible for the operation of a vehicle with driver-assistance features, like AP, that will induce further wastes of time and public resources by our legislators in writing up bills that feel the need to make the already obvious claim that the driver of a vehicle is responsible for the operation of that vehicle. That was kind of my point. We all want fully-autonomous driving, but we aren't even close to that. What we have is steadily advancing driver assistance features, but people are making the leap to "autonomous" in their minds and treating these features like they absolve them of responsibility. As I stated, this "mental leap" is mis-guided and overly-optimistic and will be detrimental to the cause. That's me putting a "positive spin" on their attitude, by the way.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Thank you for the clarity of thought.Yes, and it's people who make claims that the driver isn't responsible for the operation of a vehicle with driver-assistance features, like AP, that will induce further wastes of time and public resources by our legislators in writing up bills that feel the need to make the already obvious claim that the driver of a vehicle is responsible for the operation of that vehicle. That was kind of my point. We all want fully-autonomous driving, but we aren't even close to that. What we have is steadily advancing driver assistance features, but people are making the leap to "autonomous" in their minds and treating these features like they absolve them of responsibility. As I stated, this "mental leap" is mis-guided and overly-optimistic and will be detrimental to the cause. That's me putting a "positive spin" on their attitude, by the way.
Grouping Assisted Driving with texting is moronic. The latter is only a distraction while the former is an aid. And while AP can be abused if used inappropriately, the same is true for ABS and a host of other safety features. So by all means outlaw texting while driving, but leave actual safety assist devices alone.
Even in AP 2.0 the driver will still be responsible regardless of how automated, hopefully that will help.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
It will not. The Bill attempts to put texting and AP in the same category as DUI. Good idea for texting; awful, moronic, fluff-brained self-interest wrt to AP.
But then we are talking about a car dealership owning politician. What a combination made in hell.
Last edited:
Dstrohl
Member
Sadly I don't think this would help at this point... the federal government can set the MINIMUM standards required for automotive manufacturers to be able to sell, but that doesn't mean that states can't make laws that increase these standards.
Also, I don't think that reciprocity comes into it (though that hasn't come up yet, I don't think) While Ohio is required to recognize drivers licenses and vehicle registrations from other states (Lawriter - ORC - 4503.37 Certificate of reciprocity - exemption from requirements.), those vehicles must still be operated under the motor vehicle laws in Ohio, so, you might be able to get past the part where the cars have to be licensed as Autonomous and have different insurance, but I don't think you could get past the pretty clear statement that says "no person shall operate an autonomous vehicle on the public roads and highways in this state."
Hopefully though this wont go anywhere, it's a pretty scary precedent.
Dan
Similar threads
