Navya will be starting an autonomous vehicle taxi service next spring, that's the second quarter of 2018. So, flowers, buds on trees, and a taxi sans driver - but only in Paris - so far. Also nice is that the taxi will be EV as well as AV (electric vehicle, autonomous vehicle for you non-acronym lovers). For now, Navya merely offers a boring, corporate-styled video.
Okay, yes, I can't resist the temptation to include the boring video.
More taxi-like news
We have advanced beyond "what's good for GM is good for America" to the point where GM is going after the business of people completely car-free or at least car-lite with its Maven ridehailing service. Maven is now expanding to more cities, operating in Baltimore, DC, Boston, and Los Angeles, among others, bringing the total to eight.
GM's Maven is not yet autonomous, but it represents GM's foray into a different business model in preparation for an AV world that may not mirror the old model of a car - or two or three - in every driveway.
Off topic: Where maven comes from
Maven, by the way, is from Yiddish and means expert. In Yiddish, the word maven often carries a negative connotation, as in "What are you, a maven?" My parents always talked about the men who gossiped on the street corner in this way - people who talked, thought they were experts, but did not contribute.
However, the word has taken on a more sunny, positive disposition in American English.
2018 in Tennessee
Knoxville, TN, may soon see an AV shuttle from Local Motors. Yes, Olli will be manufactured in Knox County and an Olli AV shuttle, to be 90 percent 3D printed, will likely begin ferrying Knoxville passengers in 2019 - which is like seven years from now in AV time. (My family in materials science generally poo poo's the 3D printing thing, but Local Motors seems to be making this work, or, at least, is persistent in pursuing it.)
Hyperloop actually progressing - and being built
Despite my skepticism, two distinct and quite separate hyperloop projects have official approval to begin building - with private dollars. The first will go from Baltimore to DC and the second will be in suburban metro Denver and into the city.
What is hyperloop? In case you do not follow this stuff, wikipedia has a good page that explains pretty much everything.
Watch out MARC train, there will be a much faster way to go from Baltimore to DC - or to Baltimore for a fantastic Italian sub at Isabella's. (I say that as a native New Yorker.) Virgin Hyperloop One, an Elon Musk/Richard Branson company (renamed from Hyperloop One with the Branson investment) could be bringing Musk's vision of hyperloop pods traveling all the way from DC to NYC in less than 30 minutes. Maryland's governor has given approval to a chunk of the Baltimore to DC segment. (I hope there will be a stop at BWI Airport.)
"Hogan [Maryland's governor] administration officials said [in mid-October] the state has issued a conditional utility permit to let Musk’s tunneling firm, The Boring Co., dig a 10.3-mile tunnel beneath the state-owned portion of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway, between the Baltimore city line and Maryland 175 in Hanover. ... More than two-thirds of the 35-mile Baltimore Washington Parkway is owned by the federal government, which as of Thursday had not publicly granted permission for the hyperloop system."
The Colorado project will be built by Arrivo, which is headed by a former Elon Musk employee at SpaceX and a co-founder of Hyperloop One. This will be "a public-private partnership with Colorado’s Department of Transportation and E-470 Public Highway Authority." I can tell you personally that there is both excitement and concern about hyperloop in the growing suburbs around Denver. The Arrivo hyperloop version goes slower than the Musk version, at about 160 mph instead of at several hundred miles per hour, which has not yet been achieved.
Showing posts with label Tennessee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tennessee. Show all posts
Friday, November 17, 2017
Thursday, October 26, 2017
Local Governments Scream "What do I do now?"
All over the United States, cities and counties, even state governments, are waking up - suddenly, as if an alarm clock just went off, awakening them from a deep sleep - and they are screaming "What are we going to do when autonomous vehicles come? Ahhhhhh!!!!! Oh my g-d, what the f&*ck are AVs? CVs? V2Vs? And gas stations versus EVs?
They don't know what the future holds and how to plan; no one knows, partly because the private sector is calling the shots. Plus, federal legislation will come along to preempt state laws and state laws will preempt local laws.
[Aside: I do believe that in the next year, unless we get totally bogged down with impeachment proceedings or some nightmare major distraction, the US will see the passage of a true bipartisan law in the form of AV legislation. The regulation and on-the-street details will fall to the US Department of Transportation and state departments of transportation. Many states already have some kind of AV advisory council.]
Calling on the quiet kid in the back
Let's take Nashville as an example because its transit plans for bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail (LRT) are attracting criticism - as ambitious transit projects tend to do in car-oriented places - because of talk that shared AVs will make transit less important or not important at all. Shared AVs, some say, will absorb all of the extra congestion expected in the coming decades from Nashville's growth. So, two giant assumptions here: (1) Nashville's current population trajectory will continue, and (2) residents and workers in Nashville will be traveling in shared-AVs that are shuttle or taxi-like instead of alone in their own AVs.
So, one might say, plan for AVs. BUT no one knows when AVs will be coming, in what form, or what business models will co-exist in particular local and regional markets or which will dominate, or whether to go out now and buy all of the connected technology one can get one's hands on or whether to wait because vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) won't be necessary when every vehicle is connected to every other one.
A question answered - Where?
We do know where AVs are thanks to a cool map from the Initiative on Cities and Autonomous Vehicles (ICAV, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Aspen Institute). This screenshot is just of the US and Canada, but the Initiative map covers the globe and one can zoom in and click on a colored spot for information about the AV activity in that city AND a link to municipal information about the particular project. Very cool.
Go local
Local is in. Local is farmers markets and quirky restaurants, yarn stores, parks, and murals. But most places are full of strip malls, free parking, and street crossings and pedestrian infrastructure that are ugly and dangerous. AVs challenge the conventional transportation wisdom of free parking and everyone needing a car. However, that challenge might only be in the minds of planners and others paid to ponder transportation networks. It is possible that we will have an AV in every parking spot and companies aiming to make that goal both affordable and profitable.
Now, cities and counties are wondering how to move forward and they are hosting meetings, writing reports, investing money, and sometimes being completely frank that they are not sure what to do. In no particular order, here are some examples.
Disclaimer: What appears below is not a complete list. In fact, actual city plans are mentioned later. Scroll down if at first you become irritated.
Columbus, Ohio - Winner of the much-hailed and competitive $40 million Smart Cities Challenge (with a matching bonus of another $10 million), Columbus is perceived as having an advantage. Here is a one-year update on the Columbus demos being funded, which include autonomous shuttles and new fare card technology. Do not believe Columbus is ahead, if only because this city is very troubled. Few complete streets, terrible transit, lots of highways, illegal drugs, and big, big problems with poverty. There is so much to fix; this is a city very much tied to the automobile and the Smart Cities plan tries to do too much. Big doubts. - 😬. Columbus' plan links via ICAV.
Lake County, Illinois - Just outside of Cook County, which is mostly Chicago, Lake County is suburban and exurban, with lots of strip malls and big box stores, and some local stuff thrown in. (I've had decent falafel there and lots of good walks.) Great parks and walking trails. This is a place built around the car. Lake County is just beginning to address AVs and the already changing transportation system as it ponders the new popularity of complete streets and cities. So, being smart, nearby experts from Chicago were invited to address the Lake County Transportation Alliance about ways to improve transportation that do not involve extra lanes and more cars - or huge investments of tax dollars.
Atlanta, Georgia - Not even on the ICAV map yet, but Atlanta is promising a hi-tech, connected corridor right by Georgia Tech, with an AV shuttle. Lots of promotion and news stories about the Ponce-City-Market-to-Midtown (home of Georgia Tech) CV corridor and future AV shuttle route. Here's a boring, but informative video that focuses on the CV aspects of the project. (As a mom of a GaTech grad student, not sure the cycling stuff alleviates any concern about my biking offspring on that exact route.)
Portland, Oregon - Home of Portlandia, food trucks, and all things artisnal - way west of Brooklyn, still independent as its own city, and without the snarkiness. Have to include a clip from Portlandia. This is from a classic early episode about whether the organic chicken on the menu had a full life.
Portland's draft policy smartly considers AVs in the context of the city's transportation goals, such as Vision Zero for pedestrian and biking safety, pollution reduction, and reduction in low-occupancy vehicle trips, among others. View the Portland AV policy page for draft policy documents, timeline, and a new acronym - SAVI for Smart Autonomous Vehicles Initiative. Basically, the draft policy is four single-spaced pages stating that AVs should serve the very new urban goals that the city has already identified. That's good, BUT (you knew there would be a but) there is no explanation of who, when, or how these linkages will be made and goals accomplished. Still, this is a saner-than-Brooklyn-almost-paradise (which has had its own problems, such as the recent ethnic-reactionary murder on the streetcar). The policy identifies a rational order of priorities.
Boston, Massachusetts - The Boston Plan incorporates the laudable non-tech goals of “Zero deaths. Zero injuries. Zero disparities. Zero emissions. Zero stress.” Good way to think of technology - as a means to an end, rather than as the end. Boston has articulated definite goals, a brave move because results can be compared against actual performance. One goal even aims for improved transportation for people with disabilities: "Greater Access for Nondrivers. AVs increase the mobility of people who are unable or unwilling to drive, such as the disabled and the elderly."
While the Boston planning document makes major assumptions, it does examine a range of scenarios in terms of ownership, modes, and use of AVs. I like that. BUT this document only looks at a dense, urban area of the city instead of playing with variables for different types of neighborhoods throughout the city. Allston is not Jamaica Plain is not Beacon Hill. The document also foresees improved mobility for older adults and people with disabilities without analyzing at all the pieces that must be in place for those results to occur.
One more like: The Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) type of "digital mobility platform." Here is the image from the document. Interesting that the city is set up as the central governor of the system. Boston rightly envisions itself as part of a public/private ecosystem with which coordination must happen with other city and state bodies.
Toronto, Ontario - This Canadian city has long been on top of AV developments. Thus far, Toronto staff have acknowledged that there are too many unknowns to make firm predictions. A March 2017 document, Implications of Automated Vehicles for TTC, spends most of its pages defining variables and what exists. About two-thirds of the way in, the Toronto document lists the ways in which AVs will likely bring change to traffic, transit fleet management, workforce needs, roadway safety, and the mobility of people with disabilities (without offering any details on that one). It identifies these questions as ones that remain unanswered:
Seattle, Washington - Seattle does not so much have a plan as a working let's-look-into-these factors document, which also serves as a teaching document that defines what the heck is actually being discussed. This document nicely summarizes the federal/state/local/judicial division of responsibilities and powers.
Arizona - Just read the other day about Waymo's expansion to the four Arizona cities of Phoenix, Mesa, Tempe and Gilbert. Well, a native New Yorker would not characterize these as cities because walking and transit are not major transportation modes, but Waymo is there and those "cities" are happy. Actually, to be fair, Tempe is a real city, small, but a city.
I have now managed to write a too-long post and insult most cities in the US. At least the dog is sleeping next to me.
They don't know what the future holds and how to plan; no one knows, partly because the private sector is calling the shots. Plus, federal legislation will come along to preempt state laws and state laws will preempt local laws.
[Aside: I do believe that in the next year, unless we get totally bogged down with impeachment proceedings or some nightmare major distraction, the US will see the passage of a true bipartisan law in the form of AV legislation. The regulation and on-the-street details will fall to the US Department of Transportation and state departments of transportation. Many states already have some kind of AV advisory council.]
Calling on the quiet kid in the back
Let's take Nashville as an example because its transit plans for bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail (LRT) are attracting criticism - as ambitious transit projects tend to do in car-oriented places - because of talk that shared AVs will make transit less important or not important at all. Shared AVs, some say, will absorb all of the extra congestion expected in the coming decades from Nashville's growth. So, two giant assumptions here: (1) Nashville's current population trajectory will continue, and (2) residents and workers in Nashville will be traveling in shared-AVs that are shuttle or taxi-like instead of alone in their own AVs.
So, one might say, plan for AVs. BUT no one knows when AVs will be coming, in what form, or what business models will co-exist in particular local and regional markets or which will dominate, or whether to go out now and buy all of the connected technology one can get one's hands on or whether to wait because vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) won't be necessary when every vehicle is connected to every other one.
A question answered - Where?
We do know where AVs are thanks to a cool map from the Initiative on Cities and Autonomous Vehicles (ICAV, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Aspen Institute). This screenshot is just of the US and Canada, but the Initiative map covers the globe and one can zoom in and click on a colored spot for information about the AV activity in that city AND a link to municipal information about the particular project. Very cool.Go local
Local is in. Local is farmers markets and quirky restaurants, yarn stores, parks, and murals. But most places are full of strip malls, free parking, and street crossings and pedestrian infrastructure that are ugly and dangerous. AVs challenge the conventional transportation wisdom of free parking and everyone needing a car. However, that challenge might only be in the minds of planners and others paid to ponder transportation networks. It is possible that we will have an AV in every parking spot and companies aiming to make that goal both affordable and profitable.
Now, cities and counties are wondering how to move forward and they are hosting meetings, writing reports, investing money, and sometimes being completely frank that they are not sure what to do. In no particular order, here are some examples.
Disclaimer: What appears below is not a complete list. In fact, actual city plans are mentioned later. Scroll down if at first you become irritated.
Columbus, Ohio - Winner of the much-hailed and competitive $40 million Smart Cities Challenge (with a matching bonus of another $10 million), Columbus is perceived as having an advantage. Here is a one-year update on the Columbus demos being funded, which include autonomous shuttles and new fare card technology. Do not believe Columbus is ahead, if only because this city is very troubled. Few complete streets, terrible transit, lots of highways, illegal drugs, and big, big problems with poverty. There is so much to fix; this is a city very much tied to the automobile and the Smart Cities plan tries to do too much. Big doubts. - 😬. Columbus' plan links via ICAV.
Atlanta, Georgia - Not even on the ICAV map yet, but Atlanta is promising a hi-tech, connected corridor right by Georgia Tech, with an AV shuttle. Lots of promotion and news stories about the Ponce-City-Market-to-Midtown (home of Georgia Tech) CV corridor and future AV shuttle route. Here's a boring, but informative video that focuses on the CV aspects of the project. (As a mom of a GaTech grad student, not sure the cycling stuff alleviates any concern about my biking offspring on that exact route.)
Portland, Oregon - Home of Portlandia, food trucks, and all things artisnal - way west of Brooklyn, still independent as its own city, and without the snarkiness. Have to include a clip from Portlandia. This is from a classic early episode about whether the organic chicken on the menu had a full life.
Portland's draft policy smartly considers AVs in the context of the city's transportation goals, such as Vision Zero for pedestrian and biking safety, pollution reduction, and reduction in low-occupancy vehicle trips, among others. View the Portland AV policy page for draft policy documents, timeline, and a new acronym - SAVI for Smart Autonomous Vehicles Initiative. Basically, the draft policy is four single-spaced pages stating that AVs should serve the very new urban goals that the city has already identified. That's good, BUT (you knew there would be a but) there is no explanation of who, when, or how these linkages will be made and goals accomplished. Still, this is a saner-than-Brooklyn-almost-paradise (which has had its own problems, such as the recent ethnic-reactionary murder on the streetcar). The policy identifies a rational order of priorities.
Implement a prioritization of modes for people movement by making transportation system decisions according the following ordered list:
1. Walking
2. Bicycling
3. Transit
4. Fleets of electric, fully automated, multiple passenger vehicles
5. Other shared vehicles
6. No or low occupancy vehicles, fossil-fueled non-transit vehicles
Boston, Massachusetts - The Boston Plan incorporates the laudable non-tech goals of “Zero deaths. Zero injuries. Zero disparities. Zero emissions. Zero stress.” Good way to think of technology - as a means to an end, rather than as the end. Boston has articulated definite goals, a brave move because results can be compared against actual performance. One goal even aims for improved transportation for people with disabilities: "Greater Access for Nondrivers. AVs increase the mobility of people who are unable or unwilling to drive, such as the disabled and the elderly."While the Boston planning document makes major assumptions, it does examine a range of scenarios in terms of ownership, modes, and use of AVs. I like that. BUT this document only looks at a dense, urban area of the city instead of playing with variables for different types of neighborhoods throughout the city. Allston is not Jamaica Plain is not Beacon Hill. The document also foresees improved mobility for older adults and people with disabilities without analyzing at all the pieces that must be in place for those results to occur.
One more like: The Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) type of "digital mobility platform." Here is the image from the document. Interesting that the city is set up as the central governor of the system. Boston rightly envisions itself as part of a public/private ecosystem with which coordination must happen with other city and state bodies.Toronto, Ontario - This Canadian city has long been on top of AV developments. Thus far, Toronto staff have acknowledged that there are too many unknowns to make firm predictions. A March 2017 document, Implications of Automated Vehicles for TTC, spends most of its pages defining variables and what exists. About two-thirds of the way in, the Toronto document lists the ways in which AVs will likely bring change to traffic, transit fleet management, workforce needs, roadway safety, and the mobility of people with disabilities (without offering any details on that one). It identifies these questions as ones that remain unanswered:
- What will be the cost of the vehicles, the services needed to support them, the training to work with them, etc.?
- Will the software running the system be proprietary, or something independent of the vehicle that can be changed?
- How is liability determined between Operators, maintenance, ITS, and the manufacturer?
- What would the overall net change in costs be after considering vehicle and software procurement, new infrastructure, and changes in roles and staffing?
- How will AVs operate in inclement weather?
Seattle, Washington - Seattle does not so much have a plan as a working let's-look-into-these factors document, which also serves as a teaching document that defines what the heck is actually being discussed. This document nicely summarizes the federal/state/local/judicial division of responsibilities and powers.
Arizona - Just read the other day about Waymo's expansion to the four Arizona cities of Phoenix, Mesa, Tempe and Gilbert. Well, a native New Yorker would not characterize these as cities because walking and transit are not major transportation modes, but Waymo is there and those "cities" are happy. Actually, to be fair, Tempe is a real city, small, but a city.
I have now managed to write a too-long post and insult most cities in the US. At least the dog is sleeping next to me.
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Bluegrass Tennessee Passes AV and CV Laws - Deep Dive
If this were my inbox or a pile on my desk, I would be groaning out loud and with great suffering. I hate stuff piling up, but I let it happen this time with the seeming constant flow of legislation, particularly from US states that believe that a new law will place them in the lead of economic prosperity that autonomous vehicles will surely bring.
NOT.
You are too late; the lead on this has already been taken. Now it is better to be either a state that puts out a welcome mat for autonomous vehicles on all roads, in all situations, and with little bureaucracy, or to take a wait-and-see attitude while other states suffer from the inevitable growing pains that a disruptive on-the-streets technology will bring.
Tennessee's new autonomous vehicle law, TN S. 151, the Safe Automated Vehicles (SAVE) Act, has a few unusual provisions, but then that is what is interesting about the state laws being passed. They all differ in some way, just like current motor vehicle laws vary regarding conventional vehicles.
The statute covers the whole range of self-driving possibilities, from partially driverless to complete "automated driving systems" (ADS), which is the term employed by the statute. Read to the bottom for info about Tennessee's new platooning law.
Bluegrass State Likes Big Auto Companies
A big limitation is the restriction to any but auto manufacturers.
Siri says put on the seatbelt or we won't go. Nah, she's not mom material
The Tennessee law includes a provision that anticipates unaccompanied children riding in autonomous vehicles. The responsibility for the child will lie not with the company that manufactures or controls the vehicle at the time, but, quite logically, with the parent, guardian, or other adult who is personally responsible for the minor. As someone who grew up on the buses and trains in New York City, I am fine with this, but that kind of situation will be a big change in most American communities.
The law goes into quite a bit of detail about the child situation, specifically addressing liability if a child fails to put on a seatbelt (in my house, the kids would scream if anyone neglected to click that seatbelt). Actually, the law excuses the seatbelt neglect as far as operators of autonomous vehicles are concerned.
Usual provisions
Being picky
Though the statute uses the word "crash," the law also refers to "accidents," a term which many now oppose because the design of high-speed and other dangerous roads predictably results in road violence, injury, and death.
Convoy
Tennessee has passed a connected vehicle law TN S. 676 that allows for multi-vehicle platooning IF there is "notification to the department of transportation and the department of safety. The notification provided pursuant to this subsection (a) must include a plan for general platoon operations." AND the platooning plan is not rejected by either of these state departments within 30 days of plan notification. (Emphasis added.)
NOT.
You are too late; the lead on this has already been taken. Now it is better to be either a state that puts out a welcome mat for autonomous vehicles on all roads, in all situations, and with little bureaucracy, or to take a wait-and-see attitude while other states suffer from the inevitable growing pains that a disruptive on-the-streets technology will bring.
Tennessee's new autonomous vehicle law, TN S. 151, the Safe Automated Vehicles (SAVE) Act, has a few unusual provisions, but then that is what is interesting about the state laws being passed. They all differ in some way, just like current motor vehicle laws vary regarding conventional vehicles.
The statute covers the whole range of self-driving possibilities, from partially driverless to complete "automated driving systems" (ADS), which is the term employed by the statute. Read to the bottom for info about Tennessee's new platooning law.
Bluegrass State Likes Big Auto Companies
A big limitation is the restriction to any but auto manufacturers.
A motor vehicle manufacturer may commence a SAVE project on the streets and highways of this state after it provides notification to the department of its self-certification of the requirements set out in § 55-54-104. Only motor vehicle manufacturers are eligible to participate in a SAVE project, and each motor vehicle manufacturer is responsible for the safe operation of its participating fleet. [Emphasis added.]A manufacturer is defined in this statute as a "person" (meaning a corporation) that:
(A) Has manufactured and distributed motor vehicles in the United States that are certified to comply with all applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards; and
(B) Submitted appropriate manufacturer identification information to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as provided in 49 CFR part 566;The limitation means that tech companies that want to test AV software, sensors, etc., will have to partner with a manufacturer - or go to a more friendly state. This subsection basically says goodbye to a startup that wants to test on its own.
Siri says put on the seatbelt or we won't go. Nah, she's not mom material
The Tennessee law includes a provision that anticipates unaccompanied children riding in autonomous vehicles. The responsibility for the child will lie not with the company that manufactures or controls the vehicle at the time, but, quite logically, with the parent, guardian, or other adult who is personally responsible for the minor. As someone who grew up on the buses and trains in New York City, I am fine with this, but that kind of situation will be a big change in most American communities.
The law goes into quite a bit of detail about the child situation, specifically addressing liability if a child fails to put on a seatbelt (in my house, the kids would scream if anyone neglected to click that seatbelt). Actually, the law excuses the seatbelt neglect as far as operators of autonomous vehicles are concerned.
Usual provisions
- Pilot projects require notification that includes geographic information about pilot and testing areas, and crash notification and data reporting technology.
- Automatic or prompt notification to law enforcement in the case of a crash. "Prompt" is left undefined, but, presumably, regulations will clarify that.
- Consistent with general tort law, the Tennessee statute deems the manufacturer liable "for incidents where the ADS is at fault." Really, that goes without saying and does not create strict liability or a presumption of liability.
- And another significant, but usual, provision is a ban that preempts counties, cities, and other political subdivisions from having their own laws or policies that are more lenient or rigid than the state law. Big no to local control.
- The ADS is considered the operator for a fully autonomous vehicle.
Being picky
Though the statute uses the word "crash," the law also refers to "accidents," a term which many now oppose because the design of high-speed and other dangerous roads predictably results in road violence, injury, and death.
Convoy
Tennessee has passed a connected vehicle law TN S. 676 that allows for multi-vehicle platooning IF there is "notification to the department of transportation and the department of safety. The notification provided pursuant to this subsection (a) must include a plan for general platoon operations." AND the platooning plan is not rejected by either of these state departments within 30 days of plan notification. (Emphasis added.)
Friday, April 21, 2017
Smaller Cities Speeding Toward Autonomous Future
Beyond the driverless testing bubbles of San Francisco, Pittsburgh, and Austin where autonomous vehicles have found mostly enthusiastic homes, most cities have remained silent and let their state governments express enthusiasm or trepidation about the transportation revolution. Some, like Toronto, New York, Boston, and Atlanta, have made some noises.
Now we have a few smaller cities, technically medium size, that are begging or already laying out the red carpet for companies to come test.
Keeping it weird
Portland, Oregon, home of artisnal everything, lots of backyard chickens, and tons of tatooed people, has put the word out on its cute streets. The city is quickly drafting regulations to allow autonomous vehicle pilot programs and "specifically looking to attract programs that actively enhance Portland's current transit infrastructure or improve accessibility while also helping the city reduce its carbon emissions. The city will finalize its autonomous vehicle regulations after a two year test period." (Endgadget post, 4/19/17)
The mayor's vision is not the Pittsburgh approach of attracting one company. Rather Portland seeks to be corporate agnostic, if you will, and take all comers. All is not craft beer and homemade funky clothes, however, because not all of the Portland council city council is in agreement about setting out the autonomous car welcome mat. This remains a big question mark at the moment.
Hello Jerry!
Meanwhile, out in normally quiet and staid Sacramento, CA., the state capital, home to Governor Jerry Brown - and no, you did not wake up from a 1970s dream of the future - there is enthusiastic activity already going on to make the city a "test bed" for autonomous vehicle testing. The unspecified companies meeting with Sacramento officials probably already have permission to test on California roads. That's a complete guess, by the way.
Even the owner of the basketball team, the Sacramento Kings, is on board. The city seems to be united and ready.
Gateway to the Great Smoky Mountains
Knoxville, TN, is getting an Olli autonomous transit shuttle. Soon to be tested and taken out for spins during events, the shuttle is pencilled in for "full phase" - I assume that means actual operation - next year. Take that Manhattan - it may be Poughkeepsie gets driverless before you.
Issues outlined a/k/a questions to think about
Meanwhile, two recent reports have come out that are relevant for city planners. The first, from the National League of Cities, outlines the issues that cities should ponder and begin planning for in relation to autonomous and connected vehicle technologies. Autonomous Vehicles: A Policy Preparation Guide briefly discusses transportation and the mixture of partially and completely autonomous vehicles for an audience mostly unaware of the differences, but the report also points out privacy, cybersecurity, and other issues that will shape the autonomous experience.
The second report is A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles, an in-depth examination of the myriad legal issues - federal, state, and judicial - that will affect the adoption and regulation of the coming transportation transformation. Produced by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) legal publication division, this publication is an excellent exploration of product liability, privacy, cybersecurity, insurance, crimes, criminal procedure, and other issues, with wonderful information about statutes, regulatory regimes, and caselaw. The report falls down a bit in the prediction department, but where it sticks to legal analysis it is a fantastic read.
This is a web not only of different areas of the law and different responsibilities, from administrative agencies to the courts, but also of different levels of government - local, state, and federal - having their fingers in the pie. The report lays out this complex matrix quite nicely. It's a great read for transportation law nerds. Guilty here on both.
Now we have a few smaller cities, technically medium size, that are begging or already laying out the red carpet for companies to come test.
Keeping it weird
Portland, Oregon, home of artisnal everything, lots of backyard chickens, and tons of tatooed people, has put the word out on its cute streets. The city is quickly drafting regulations to allow autonomous vehicle pilot programs and "specifically looking to attract programs that actively enhance Portland's current transit infrastructure or improve accessibility while also helping the city reduce its carbon emissions. The city will finalize its autonomous vehicle regulations after a two year test period." (Endgadget post, 4/19/17)
The mayor's vision is not the Pittsburgh approach of attracting one company. Rather Portland seeks to be corporate agnostic, if you will, and take all comers. All is not craft beer and homemade funky clothes, however, because not all of the Portland council city council is in agreement about setting out the autonomous car welcome mat. This remains a big question mark at the moment.
Hello Jerry!
Meanwhile, out in normally quiet and staid Sacramento, CA., the state capital, home to Governor Jerry Brown - and no, you did not wake up from a 1970s dream of the future - there is enthusiastic activity already going on to make the city a "test bed" for autonomous vehicle testing. The unspecified companies meeting with Sacramento officials probably already have permission to test on California roads. That's a complete guess, by the way.
Even the owner of the basketball team, the Sacramento Kings, is on board. The city seems to be united and ready.
Gateway to the Great Smoky Mountains
Knoxville, TN, is getting an Olli autonomous transit shuttle. Soon to be tested and taken out for spins during events, the shuttle is pencilled in for "full phase" - I assume that means actual operation - next year. Take that Manhattan - it may be Poughkeepsie gets driverless before you.
Issues outlined a/k/a questions to think about
Meanwhile, two recent reports have come out that are relevant for city planners. The first, from the National League of Cities, outlines the issues that cities should ponder and begin planning for in relation to autonomous and connected vehicle technologies. Autonomous Vehicles: A Policy Preparation Guide briefly discusses transportation and the mixture of partially and completely autonomous vehicles for an audience mostly unaware of the differences, but the report also points out privacy, cybersecurity, and other issues that will shape the autonomous experience.
The second report is A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles, an in-depth examination of the myriad legal issues - federal, state, and judicial - that will affect the adoption and regulation of the coming transportation transformation. Produced by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) legal publication division, this publication is an excellent exploration of product liability, privacy, cybersecurity, insurance, crimes, criminal procedure, and other issues, with wonderful information about statutes, regulatory regimes, and caselaw. The report falls down a bit in the prediction department, but where it sticks to legal analysis it is a fantastic read.
This is a web not only of different areas of the law and different responsibilities, from administrative agencies to the courts, but also of different levels of government - local, state, and federal - having their fingers in the pie. The report lays out this complex matrix quite nicely. It's a great read for transportation law nerds. Guilty here on both.
Friday, February 10, 2017
Long Post: Georgia, Florida, Singapore, Etc Legislation
Singapore, which is already hosting a driverless pilot, is moving ahead in the legal realm as well. A new law in Singapore will allow for testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads. This paves the way, no pun intended, for the Land Transport Authority (quite roughly translated as a department of transportation) to regulate the where, when, design, and required data, among other aspects, of testing initiatives. Companies doing the testing - and the humans inside the testing vehicles - would be exempt from the road safety law that applies to conventional vehicles and their human drivers.
The new law will remain in effect for five years to reflect the reality that the fast pace of this emerging industry will require legal changes. Though the law contemplates the possibility of no human being present in the vehicle, if and only if certain ducks are lined up in a row, until then violation-free, licensed humans must be on board to monitor and take over control if necessary.
Elsewhere in Asia
Okay, presume my knowledge of geography is limited to the five boroughs of New York City and then sketchy for the US, Canada, and Western Europe. It's not quite there for Asia at all. So, elsewhere in Asia, this time in South Korea (the Korea without the crazy person at the helm) there is a new law applicable to driverless vehicles testing. The Korea Automobile Management Act permits testing on public roads and does away with the two-human requirement for vehicles being tested. "Safety zones" are exempt. I'm wondering if that's analogous to the US drug-free and reduced speed limits near schools, but I have not one iota of South Korean legal knowledge except for this bit of information. (The linked article from Forbes goes into much more detail about driverless developments in this country.)
Driverless candy
Uber and others are investing in flying driverless commuter transportation. Just hired for the ride hailing behemoth - still waiting to make a profit - is a former NASA aircraft engineer. The trips envisioned are distances of 50 to 100 miles. So, in New York terms, think longer than Greenwich, CT, and more in the neighborhood of Southampton, Long Island to the City. This luxury will, presumably, not help the commutes of babysitters, nurse's aides, or fast food workers.
Not only cars and aircraft will be driverless, there will be massive autonomous container ships with no one at the helm. That's a Rolls Royce venture.
The new law will remain in effect for five years to reflect the reality that the fast pace of this emerging industry will require legal changes. Though the law contemplates the possibility of no human being present in the vehicle, if and only if certain ducks are lined up in a row, until then violation-free, licensed humans must be on board to monitor and take over control if necessary.
Elsewhere in Asia
Okay, presume my knowledge of geography is limited to the five boroughs of New York City and then sketchy for the US, Canada, and Western Europe. It's not quite there for Asia at all. So, elsewhere in Asia, this time in South Korea (the Korea without the crazy person at the helm) there is a new law applicable to driverless vehicles testing. The Korea Automobile Management Act permits testing on public roads and does away with the two-human requirement for vehicles being tested. "Safety zones" are exempt. I'm wondering if that's analogous to the US drug-free and reduced speed limits near schools, but I have not one iota of South Korean legal knowledge except for this bit of information. (The linked article from Forbes goes into much more detail about driverless developments in this country.)
No need for person with a license ...
and US regulatory options to ponder
I read what turned out to be somewhat old article - a few months in the past - about California's revised draft regulation that self-driving vehicles deemed sufficiently capable and safe (licensed?) by the federal government - through NHTSA? - will not require the presence of a human licensed driver when these vehicles are operating on public roads. Despite the timing of the article, it offers a thoughtful exploration of the need for uniformity among US states and the possibility of federal preemption.
For all of you who are not constitutional scholars and who have not attended law school, preemption refers to those matters on which the US Constitution allows for national law to govern and even to, shall I say it, trump (overrule) state laws. Interstate commerce is the most prominent subject of preemption in action, but often, instead of preemption, we see state cooperation in the adoption of uniform laws, the most famous of which is the Uniform Commercial Code. Translation: There is more than one regulatory option for achieving a seamless national driverless transportation network.
Commercial interruption: Driverless Chevy Bolt called Albatross on streets of San Fransisco. No Michael Douglas or Karl Malden and that's a weird name for a car. Yes, here is the opening for the 70s TV show.
Georgia on my mind
A Georgia legislator has introduced a bill that would govern autonomous vehicles and would not require the presence of a human driver. HR 248 (click further for full text) considers the "manufacturer" to be the driver when the vehicle is in automated mode. It also contemplates vehicles being in self-driving mode or being operated at times by a human person - as opposed to US Supreme Court decisions that define "person" to include corporations.
The Georgia bill assumes a leading role, as other state laws do, for NHTSA (the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) for submission of equipment and software documentation. Automated vehicle testing in Georgia would be allowed, but manufacturers would be required to submit an annual report about crashes and vehicle failures. When crashes or failures occur, systems are required that would automatically generate a report to a local police department. There would be no obligation for the automated vehicle itself to communicate with the owner of another vehicle or damaged property. Local police will use forms generated at the state Department of Transportation for crash and failure reporting.
Automated car = automated crash reporting
What does this mean? Georgia would require that automated vehicles be equipped with crash reporting technology and a data recording system. Oh, and if you are driving a vehicle made before 1965, you do not have to wear a seatbelt in Georgia. I'll tell my parents to get back their red '57 Chevy. (Yes, they actually had one and drove it for 11 years. We were the only family with such an old car.) Occupants of automated vehicles will be required to wear seat belts.
For a passenger, and, presumably, for an employee of the company testing the vehicle, there would be a waiver of the right to privacy in data generated. Towns, cities, counties, or other jurisdictions below the Georgia state level would not be empowered to impose fees or restrictions on testing or testing companies relating to testing in their jurisdictions. The Georgia bill also contains a bunch of provisions meant to decrease distracted driving - by humans - and to penalize driving away without paying for gas.
This article explains the considerations at play in the Peach State and why legislators are acting quickly.
Florida tries to say ahead on law
A state legislator in Florida introduced HB 725, a driverless bill, this week. The bill would deem the "autonomous technology" to be the vehicle operator and a human would not be required to be physically present in a vehicle or to be licensed in connection with the operation of an autonomous vehicle. In contrast to Georgia, in terms of reporting any crashes or other incidents, Florida puts the responsibility in human hands for reporting. Georgia is assuming that technology can and will take care of that task.
Florida's legislation would require the vehicle technology to alert humans, licensed or not, that failure is imminent and the bill would mandate that the vehicle safely be be equipped to travel to a safe spot where it will shut off. However, the bill also contemplates that a licensed human could take over operation in the situation of such a failure. The bill's text has details.
Tennessee bill introduced
Another piece of proposed legislation in a US state that contemplates vehicles without any licensed humans, or any humans, aboard. The legislation, HB 1131, was introduced this week in Tennessee. Like bills in other states, compliance with vehicle safety laws and some kind of getting-out-of-trouble mode would be required so that the driverless vehicle would quietly transport itself to a safe space before wreaking havoc in the middle of a road. Similar to Florida, when in automated mode, the autonomous technology will be deemed the driver. As you can see, when it comes to legislation, plagarism is allowed and desirable so that one can cross state lines without problems.
To protect the automotive industry, the bill would exempt car companies from liability if vehicles were retrofitted with equipment and software that transforms it into a self-driving vehicle. Therefore, even if the company knows or should know that people are right and left dramatically altering their conventional vehicles, the auto manufacturers would win a lawsuit automatically.
Likewise for software manufacturers whose code is edited by anyone other than the company without its consent.
New Zealand ambition for driverless transit
From the land where the Lord of the Rings trilogy was filmed comes an ambitious local representative on a regional council who sees the transformative power of driverless public transit for Tauranga, a city down in New Zealand. Transit there is not currently attracting much ridership, but Andrew von Dadelszen is pushing his region to plan now for the inevitable transportation revolution. There is a cost-conscious angle at work here: von Dadelszen sees driverless buses as being a cheap and effective alternative to light rail, which takes years of planning and lots of money to put into place.
Uber and others are investing in flying driverless commuter transportation. Just hired for the ride hailing behemoth - still waiting to make a profit - is a former NASA aircraft engineer. The trips envisioned are distances of 50 to 100 miles. So, in New York terms, think longer than Greenwich, CT, and more in the neighborhood of Southampton, Long Island to the City. This luxury will, presumably, not help the commutes of babysitters, nurse's aides, or fast food workers.
Not only cars and aircraft will be driverless, there will be massive autonomous container ships with no one at the helm. That's a Rolls Royce venture.
Friday, October 28, 2016
Today Is Sponsored by the Letter N
nuTonomy - One of the driverless cars tooling around Singapore in anticipation of AV-taxibot services got into an accident with a truck. In marked contrast to Tesla, but in taking a page from Google PR on handling minor accidents, nuTonomy has been up front about what happened: nuTonomy has halted driverless operations and it has released all data.
Nvidia - This AI savvy company is cuddling up with Tesla, which makes sense because the founder is the proud owner of a Tesla car. Musk and Huang, Nvidia's CEO, have met at various forums and now the companies of these friends are going to capitalize on Nvidia's AI system for driverless vehicles, DRIVE PX 2, which will be used in Tesla cars.
It is safe to say that Nvidia is the leading or one of the leading companies developing AI for driverless vehicles.
Nashville - The Tennessee city has been selected as one of five international cities for technical assistance in planning and technology to prepare for driverless and connected vehicles. The other cities are Austin, Paris, Buenos Aires, and Los Angeles; plus, five more will be added within the next two months. Today is for the letter N, so we will celebrate Nashville. The program is officially called the Bloomberg Aspen Initiative on Cities and Autonomous Vehicles and it aims to develop a set of policy recommendations for ways cities should plan and use their land and resources for when automated vehicles arrive on their roadways.
With a word from the letter W
Wheego is changing its image and its purpose from being a tiny electric car company to being an autonomous car company - yet another driverless testing permit for the state of California - with an emphasis on deep learning and artificial intelligence (AI). Using the word of the month, pivoting is what Wheego is doing and the pivot has a geographic element. The company is shifting its focus from the US to China. The new official name of Wheego is Wheego Technologies.
Alphabet bomb
Google is ready for its car business to go out on its own. Google's Alphabet car will soon be a standalone business. Corporate legal stuff (a technical term) is in the works. No plans released yet for how the cars or travel will be sold.
Grammar
Comma.ai has been stopped in its tracks. Slated to sell its driverless-in-a-box add-on for existing cars by the end of this year (within the next two months), NHTSA has warned Comma.ai to not sell its product due to possible conflicts with federal regulations.
Nvidia - This AI savvy company is cuddling up with Tesla, which makes sense because the founder is the proud owner of a Tesla car. Musk and Huang, Nvidia's CEO, have met at various forums and now the companies of these friends are going to capitalize on Nvidia's AI system for driverless vehicles, DRIVE PX 2, which will be used in Tesla cars.
DRIVE PX 2 is an end-to-end AI computing system that uses groundbreaking approaches in deep learning to perceive and understand the car’s surroundings… [and] lets carmakers first train their own deep neural networks on GPU supercomputers. Once loaded into the car, it processes the networks at high speed to provide the real-time, accurate response required for autonomous driving.
It is safe to say that Nvidia is the leading or one of the leading companies developing AI for driverless vehicles.
Nashville - The Tennessee city has been selected as one of five international cities for technical assistance in planning and technology to prepare for driverless and connected vehicles. The other cities are Austin, Paris, Buenos Aires, and Los Angeles; plus, five more will be added within the next two months. Today is for the letter N, so we will celebrate Nashville. The program is officially called the Bloomberg Aspen Initiative on Cities and Autonomous Vehicles and it aims to develop a set of policy recommendations for ways cities should plan and use their land and resources for when automated vehicles arrive on their roadways.
With a word from the letter W
Wheego is changing its image and its purpose from being a tiny electric car company to being an autonomous car company - yet another driverless testing permit for the state of California - with an emphasis on deep learning and artificial intelligence (AI). Using the word of the month, pivoting is what Wheego is doing and the pivot has a geographic element. The company is shifting its focus from the US to China. The new official name of Wheego is Wheego Technologies.
Alphabet bomb
Google is ready for its car business to go out on its own. Google's Alphabet car will soon be a standalone business. Corporate legal stuff (a technical term) is in the works. No plans released yet for how the cars or travel will be sold.
Grammar
Comma.ai has been stopped in its tracks. Slated to sell its driverless-in-a-box add-on for existing cars by the end of this year (within the next two months), NHTSA has warned Comma.ai to not sell its product due to possible conflicts with federal regulations.
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
There's a Driverless Bandwagon - and States Are Jumping On It
Totally swamped at work, but just wanted to jot down notes about the tons of activity among state legislators and others who want to test, manufacture, or otherwise welcome driverless transportation.
Ohio - Route 33 proposed as a test road for driverless. Ohio State University (OSU) would be involved.
Tennessee - SB 1561 legislation made it out of committee. An enthusiastic legislator is talking up the possibilities for driverless in the state. Here is the link straight to SB 1561.
Florida - Go out and buy that vehicle without the steering wheel and the brakes. HB 7061 is a blast!
California - AB 2866 goes in the same direction as the Florida bill. Must be something about warm weather states. Text is more clear than Florida's. Read here. A legislative hearing will be held on Apr. 18.
Europe - reported divisions over regulation of driverless transportation.
I have yet to read the written comments submitted to NHTSA - the US National Highway Transportation Safety Administration - following the Apr. 8 hearing in DC. Hope to get to that this weekend. Not sure. I want to bake bread and do some artwork.
Ohio - Route 33 proposed as a test road for driverless. Ohio State University (OSU) would be involved.
Tennessee - SB 1561 legislation made it out of committee. An enthusiastic legislator is talking up the possibilities for driverless in the state. Here is the link straight to SB 1561.
Florida - Go out and buy that vehicle without the steering wheel and the brakes. HB 7061 is a blast!
California - AB 2866 goes in the same direction as the Florida bill. Must be something about warm weather states. Text is more clear than Florida's. Read here. A legislative hearing will be held on Apr. 18.
Europe - reported divisions over regulation of driverless transportation.
I have yet to read the written comments submitted to NHTSA - the US National Highway Transportation Safety Administration - following the Apr. 8 hearing in DC. Hope to get to that this weekend. Not sure. I want to bake bread and do some artwork.
Friday, January 29, 2016
No Steering Wheel Legislation in California and Tennessee
California
AB 1592 - This proposed legislation will not satisfy Google, but it does expressly permit a planned pilot of driverless transit by the Contra Costa Transit Authority, presumably the one planned at the Bishop Ranch office park. The bill would permit for a Contra Costa transit vehicle to operate without a steering wheel or brakes.
Tennessee
HB 1564/SB 1561 - The proposed bill conceives of both ORAVs and NORAVs. ORAVs are operator-required autonomous vehicles, meaning that a human driver is present and the machinery (i.e. steering wheel, brakes) is in place to allow for a person to take over the operation of the vehicle. The legislation is specific about when testing of these vehicles is permitted and mirrors the current laws in the few other states that allow for driverless testing.
NORAVs are no-operator-required autonomous vehicles. For NORAVs, the legislation pretty much kicks the can down the road.
AB 1592 - This proposed legislation will not satisfy Google, but it does expressly permit a planned pilot of driverless transit by the Contra Costa Transit Authority, presumably the one planned at the Bishop Ranch office park. The bill would permit for a Contra Costa transit vehicle to operate without a steering wheel or brakes.
Tennessee
HB 1564/SB 1561 - The proposed bill conceives of both ORAVs and NORAVs. ORAVs are operator-required autonomous vehicles, meaning that a human driver is present and the machinery (i.e. steering wheel, brakes) is in place to allow for a person to take over the operation of the vehicle. The legislation is specific about when testing of these vehicles is permitted and mirrors the current laws in the few other states that allow for driverless testing.
NORAVs are no-operator-required autonomous vehicles. For NORAVs, the legislation pretty much kicks the can down the road.
[T]his bill requires the department of safety, in consultation with the department of transportation, to promulgate rules for the testing, sale or leasing, and operation of NORAVs. The rules must establish standards for equipment used in autonomous systems and for the performance of a NORAV that are necessary to ensure the safe operation of such vehicles on the streets and highways of this state.If passed, the Tennessee law would not become effective for almost a year, until Jan. 1, 2017. There is no deadline provided for NORAV regulations to be promulgated and to become effective.
Friday, January 8, 2016
Race Is On: Tesla vs. Ford/Google vs. GM/Lyft etc
Elon Musk is pushing up his timeline, now saying that a completely driverless Tesla will be available in two years. Apparently, Musk does not want to be outdone by Google or Uber. Maybe Musk was alarmed by the early rumors of the Ford/Google coupling.
The Ford/Google rumored marriage will be an immediate powerhouse coupling of technology and automobile manufacturing. Ford has been making quite progressive statements and moves of late. The company is applying for patents right and left, particularly relating to driverless technology and connected vehicles. What better spouse could Google desire as it readies itself to progress from testing to sales, taxi pods, and other strategies for selling the driverless dream?
A menage a trois?
Ford has announced that it will work with Amazon to use the delivery/warehouse/online-retailer's personal assistant software in Ford's driverless vehicles. The software will enable a person to remotely control or monitor the vehicle. Call the car, check it's oil, crash a KGB agent - oh wait, I'm too immersed in watching The Americans.
Yes, yes, I've been busy with other stuff, what with baking and actual office work and real life. But driverless developments literally never sleep.
And another entrant into the race
Everyone - and I mean every auto company - is at least attempting to compete in this race. Here's a rundown of recent activity. It is not complete. For example, I've left out anyone currently saying they are aiming for a 2030 rollout of a completely driverless vehicle.
GM and Lyft's partnership has gotten lots of buzz. Here's two articles.
1. GM/Lyft partnership looks like a giant "We're out to beat Uber" quest - and GM happens to include in its plans a driverless component as part of it's Michigan campus activities.
2. A different view perceives the GM/Lyft partnership as the first step into a networked foray into the driverless-shared-vehicle-universe.
A European/Asian alliance and more
Renault/Nissan partnership to sell driverless cars by 2020.
Mercedes procures driverless license in Nevada, but the car is only partially autonomous.
Volvo banking on AI software and will be testing it in the carmaker's hometown.
Watch the movie on the way to school
Volvo is also working on media streaming for driverless cars. Apparently, the Swedish car company believes we are all screen addicts. Let's face it, many people are.
And late to the party
Nashville's mayor and Tennessee's legislature are making noises about encouraging driverless testing and travel. Nothing happening yet.
The Ford/Google rumored marriage will be an immediate powerhouse coupling of technology and automobile manufacturing. Ford has been making quite progressive statements and moves of late. The company is applying for patents right and left, particularly relating to driverless technology and connected vehicles. What better spouse could Google desire as it readies itself to progress from testing to sales, taxi pods, and other strategies for selling the driverless dream?
A menage a trois?
Ford has announced that it will work with Amazon to use the delivery/warehouse/online-retailer's personal assistant software in Ford's driverless vehicles. The software will enable a person to remotely control or monitor the vehicle. Call the car, check it's oil, crash a KGB agent - oh wait, I'm too immersed in watching The Americans.
Yes, yes, I've been busy with other stuff, what with baking and actual office work and real life. But driverless developments literally never sleep.
And another entrant into the race
Everyone - and I mean every auto company - is at least attempting to compete in this race. Here's a rundown of recent activity. It is not complete. For example, I've left out anyone currently saying they are aiming for a 2030 rollout of a completely driverless vehicle.
GM and Lyft's partnership has gotten lots of buzz. Here's two articles.
1. GM/Lyft partnership looks like a giant "We're out to beat Uber" quest - and GM happens to include in its plans a driverless component as part of it's Michigan campus activities.
2. A different view perceives the GM/Lyft partnership as the first step into a networked foray into the driverless-shared-vehicle-universe.
A European/Asian alliance and more
Renault/Nissan partnership to sell driverless cars by 2020.
Mercedes procures driverless license in Nevada, but the car is only partially autonomous.
Volvo banking on AI software and will be testing it in the carmaker's hometown.
Watch the movie on the way to school
Volvo is also working on media streaming for driverless cars. Apparently, the Swedish car company believes we are all screen addicts. Let's face it, many people are.
And late to the party
Nashville's mayor and Tennessee's legislature are making noises about encouraging driverless testing and travel. Nothing happening yet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)