One More NHTSA Comment

This late comment to NHTSA is an interesting one because it is not from someone with an axe to grind; this is an ordinary citizen, albeit an engineer. Unlike many ordinary people, who are able to ignore the 30,000+ plus deaths on US roads each year (until, G-d forbid, a crash affects them in a personal way), the person who submitted the comment has stated a central truth of the quest for driverless vehicles: they will be a whole lot safer than human-operated vehicles.

The commentator emphasizes the huge number of deaths and injuries and their causes: drunk driving, driving while drowsy, driving while using cell phones (including texting), driving while eating or drinking, and driving with road rage. He cites personal experience as a former firefighter who responded to accident scenes. He even regrets his own statistically unwise decision as a graduate student to drive many hours back home instead of taking a safer mode - which would be any other mode - of transportation. And then he offers the comparative statistics, which are alarming in just how much more lethal driving is than any other mode.

I write this with my heart in my mouth because this weekend I will be in a car on one of those long-distance, high-speed, congested road trips for approximately 10 hours and I know this commentator's data is unimpeachable.

Even Shakespeare would admit that engineers are not lawyers

Although Shakespeare had no affection for lawyers, I do believe even he might be startled by the impractical system of laws and technology that the commentator proposes. I disagree with the whole package.

The commentator suggests that we allow each state to have its own laws regulating driverless vehicle operations. He is not bothered by the specter of inconsistency that keeps car company lawyers awake at night. Oh no, because he proposes that the solution lies both in allowing each state to find its own comfort level with driverless vehicles and with having technology in place that alerts drivers when a state line is approaching. For example, one might be allowed to nap in the car and be completely driverless in state A, then get beeped one mile from the state border of state B, which bans self-driving vehicles altogether.

I believe the suggestion is completely unworkable. 

Get-me-to-the-hospital programming

The commentator does make an interesting suggestion that vehicles should be programmed to head to the nearest emergency room when told to do so or according to customized settings that allow for input about specific medical conditions. Not everyone, after all, is conscious when in need of an emergency room. 

I am glad to see a concerned citizen providing input. This is democracy in action; this is the marketplace of ideas; this is an individual taking the time to share his thoughts with a government agency about an important matter. 

And what will NHTSA do?

NHTSA is saying it will be another few months before it makes any proclamations, but with a Presidential election so near and technology in the driverless field advancing from week to week, it is really anyone's guess when an official statement or proposed guidelines or regulations will be forthcoming.