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.
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Tea Leaves and Intrigue at the NHTSA Public Hearing in DC
I was there on April 8. Not glamorous, just a federal agency building with tighter security than any airport - with the exception of getting into Israel. A decent number of attendees showed up, about 75. The panelists, on their dais, listening all day, mostly appeared bored, but they perked up at times. I suspect that NHTSA already knows what it wants to do; now it is figuring out who will be on what side and what possible public ranting will go on.
Who was there?
A big surprise was the outsize presence of the disability community and the call for equitable - and universally designed - transportation choices and interfaces for people with all kinds of disabilities. The representatives of the disability community were the most enthusiastic supporters of driverless vehicles and government support, or at least avoiding government from getting in the way of technology development and deployment.
In fact, the only speakers who contemplated the possibilities of driverless and the complete remake of how vehicles are designed were speakers from the disability community.
This was a different crowd than I usually see at DOT events because I don't do anything professional related to cars. There were lots of car people, specifically representatives of auto makers, both domestic and Honda, as well as auto-related association folks and safety people. A very early Mad Men crowd - overwhelmingly white, older, in suits. Mostly male. Not the look of a Bernie gathering.
We all agree that ...
Technology neutral was a given, much mentioned, and without any argument or debate. No wants guidance or regulation that is only good for today's gizmos and software.
However US regulation is accomplished, let it be consistent across the country. No one wants a patchwork of state laws, regulations, and policies. BUT - the question of whether guidance, voluntary standards, or regulations should be used is a different story. There were a couple of people who spoke who did not exactly trust that guidance or voluntary standards are sufficient to achieve safety. One speaker was a NHTSA administrator during the Carter Administration. She did not seem to trust DOT coziness with auto or tech companies at all.
Lots of people saying ...
Words like "incremental," "AV may be decades away," and "for the foreseeable future ... we want driver controls," passed many lips. It's as if none of these people have driven with either a teenager or a person in his or her 80s who can't believe it's time to give up the car keys. They all seem to think that a human is the safety valve.
Some of the calls for incrementalism came from companies that are not ready to go driverless themselves, but even Consumer Watchdog is all in a dither about how Google cars are not 100 percent perfect. Seems like its driverless accidents have been pretty minor compared to humans behind the wheel.
Some suggested, but did not go so far as to state outright, that driverless vehicles should be completely safe before we allow people to ride in them, purchase them, or otherwise routinely use them.
What news do these people read?
I'm not getting this attachment to the human driver. HELLO! Humans are the ones causing 95 percent of all crashes, remember the ones killing 30,000-plus people a year and injuring hundreds of thousands a year just in the US? Millions of people across the world are harmed each year simply because they are walking across a street, biking on a country road, or rushing down a highway to get somewhere on time. If driverless technology can do better, and I suspect it already can, then throw those lethal keys to the ignition away. Get a life. Watch a movie. Read a book. Irritate your fellow passengers by having a long phone conversation. Listen to a podcast. Stare out the window. Nap. Why drive?
Lots of paranoia
There was a lot said about fear of privacy violations and hacking. One person went on and on about terrorists taking over driverless vehicles. Excuse me, but don't they do that now? Terrorists have the capability and currently inflict lots of damage without any need for advanced technology. Those Boston marathon murderers did well, so to speak, without any fancy hardware or software.
What I said
I spoke on behalf of the Community Transportation Association of America, my employer, about universal design and access, specifically about vehicle design and interfaces with software. I also called for attention to access to shared-use driverless modes where people will arrive by foot or bike to meeting points, thus requiring safe pedestrian and bike infrastructure.
I spoke on behalf of myself when I asked that partially autonomous vehicles be studied in terms of this assumption that drivers will be immediately capable of taking over a vehicle during a nap, while reading, or while on the 100th trip on the same boring road.
Let unsaid
What I left unsaid was a dedication of my remarks and my work to the memory of 24-year-old Alex Federman, who perished late last spring in yet another car crash. The grief that Alex's family has and continues to experience is a needless tragedy in itself.
Next NHTSA hearing on Apr. 27 at Stanford University.
Who was there?
A big surprise was the outsize presence of the disability community and the call for equitable - and universally designed - transportation choices and interfaces for people with all kinds of disabilities. The representatives of the disability community were the most enthusiastic supporters of driverless vehicles and government support, or at least avoiding government from getting in the way of technology development and deployment.
In fact, the only speakers who contemplated the possibilities of driverless and the complete remake of how vehicles are designed were speakers from the disability community.
This was a different crowd than I usually see at DOT events because I don't do anything professional related to cars. There were lots of car people, specifically representatives of auto makers, both domestic and Honda, as well as auto-related association folks and safety people. A very early Mad Men crowd - overwhelmingly white, older, in suits. Mostly male. Not the look of a Bernie gathering.
We all agree that ...
Technology neutral was a given, much mentioned, and without any argument or debate. No wants guidance or regulation that is only good for today's gizmos and software.
However US regulation is accomplished, let it be consistent across the country. No one wants a patchwork of state laws, regulations, and policies. BUT - the question of whether guidance, voluntary standards, or regulations should be used is a different story. There were a couple of people who spoke who did not exactly trust that guidance or voluntary standards are sufficient to achieve safety. One speaker was a NHTSA administrator during the Carter Administration. She did not seem to trust DOT coziness with auto or tech companies at all.
Lots of people saying ...
Words like "incremental," "AV may be decades away," and "for the foreseeable future ... we want driver controls," passed many lips. It's as if none of these people have driven with either a teenager or a person in his or her 80s who can't believe it's time to give up the car keys. They all seem to think that a human is the safety valve.
Some of the calls for incrementalism came from companies that are not ready to go driverless themselves, but even Consumer Watchdog is all in a dither about how Google cars are not 100 percent perfect. Seems like its driverless accidents have been pretty minor compared to humans behind the wheel.
Some suggested, but did not go so far as to state outright, that driverless vehicles should be completely safe before we allow people to ride in them, purchase them, or otherwise routinely use them.
What news do these people read?
I'm not getting this attachment to the human driver. HELLO! Humans are the ones causing 95 percent of all crashes, remember the ones killing 30,000-plus people a year and injuring hundreds of thousands a year just in the US? Millions of people across the world are harmed each year simply because they are walking across a street, biking on a country road, or rushing down a highway to get somewhere on time. If driverless technology can do better, and I suspect it already can, then throw those lethal keys to the ignition away. Get a life. Watch a movie. Read a book. Irritate your fellow passengers by having a long phone conversation. Listen to a podcast. Stare out the window. Nap. Why drive?
Lots of paranoia
There was a lot said about fear of privacy violations and hacking. One person went on and on about terrorists taking over driverless vehicles. Excuse me, but don't they do that now? Terrorists have the capability and currently inflict lots of damage without any need for advanced technology. Those Boston marathon murderers did well, so to speak, without any fancy hardware or software.
What I said
I spoke on behalf of the Community Transportation Association of America, my employer, about universal design and access, specifically about vehicle design and interfaces with software. I also called for attention to access to shared-use driverless modes where people will arrive by foot or bike to meeting points, thus requiring safe pedestrian and bike infrastructure.
I spoke on behalf of myself when I asked that partially autonomous vehicles be studied in terms of this assumption that drivers will be immediately capable of taking over a vehicle during a nap, while reading, or while on the 100th trip on the same boring road.
Let unsaid
What I left unsaid was a dedication of my remarks and my work to the memory of 24-year-old Alex Federman, who perished late last spring in yet another car crash. The grief that Alex's family has and continues to experience is a needless tragedy in itself.
Next NHTSA hearing on Apr. 27 at Stanford University.
Cities Feet First? And Buy Driverless from Comma.ai in December, January?
Beverly Hills is jumping on the bandwagon - before there is one - to bring driverless transit shuttles to the pretty, enormously wealthy, city, really an enclave of Los Angeles.
With its tall trees and pretty, oh-so-expensive houses, can't you see zipping around in a driverless shuttle while sipping a latte? (I take mine with actual dairy cream, but in Beverly Hills, you are probably talking a soy or almond latte crowd.)
Canada was first - but quietly
Toronto is already a year and a half into a two-year planning exercise to get ready for the driverless future and envision what it will look like. But where Beverly Hills differs is its proclamation to bring on the future now.
The Beverly Hills city council voted unanimously in favor of the transit shuttle.
Maybe the city should contact George Hotz at Comma.ai, which just received more than $3 million in venture capital. Hotz, an arrogant and brilliant former hacker, whom Tesla tried to hire, is vowing that by the end of the year - that's 2016 - he will be selling a self-driving kit or $1000 or less.
So for $999 (and the jitsu knife for free?), Hotz will sell the camera, sensors, and software. Unlike the piece-by-piece, rule-by-rule approach to driverless technology improvement, Hotz is "teaching" the vehicle. The software learns and accumulates knowledge.
Here's yesterday's Bloomberg news interview with Hotz.
Nocturnal, too?
I don't know whether Hotz's car is ready for night-time driving, but Ford is letting it be known that it's driverless cars can "see" at night. In fact, they don't need lights because of the LIDAR technology. Here's the best video news coverage I have seen. Velodyne is the manufacturer of the in-the-dark technology.
And in a land far away, ...
A 2000 mile driverless journey has already started with its first mile in China. The car will drive on highways and, I think, in city traffic in several cities, including Beijing. The wording of the article is somewhat unclear when it comes to urban streets. The company is not Baidu, but Chang'an Automobile. This is a state-owned, no-frills, company.
Since I'm reporting on ambitious plans today, I'll add that Chang'an plans to begin selling driverless cars in 2018. Okay that's my interpretation of the words "put into commercial use." Maybe they are thinking more in terms of taxi pods. Not sure.
With its tall trees and pretty, oh-so-expensive houses, can't you see zipping around in a driverless shuttle while sipping a latte? (I take mine with actual dairy cream, but in Beverly Hills, you are probably talking a soy or almond latte crowd.)
Canada was first - but quietly
Toronto is already a year and a half into a two-year planning exercise to get ready for the driverless future and envision what it will look like. But where Beverly Hills differs is its proclamation to bring on the future now.
The Beverly Hills city council voted unanimously in favor of the transit shuttle.
Maybe the city should contact George Hotz at Comma.ai, which just received more than $3 million in venture capital. Hotz, an arrogant and brilliant former hacker, whom Tesla tried to hire, is vowing that by the end of the year - that's 2016 - he will be selling a self-driving kit or $1000 or less.
So for $999 (and the jitsu knife for free?), Hotz will sell the camera, sensors, and software. Unlike the piece-by-piece, rule-by-rule approach to driverless technology improvement, Hotz is "teaching" the vehicle. The software learns and accumulates knowledge.
Here's yesterday's Bloomberg news interview with Hotz.
Nocturnal, too?
I don't know whether Hotz's car is ready for night-time driving, but Ford is letting it be known that it's driverless cars can "see" at night. In fact, they don't need lights because of the LIDAR technology. Here's the best video news coverage I have seen. Velodyne is the manufacturer of the in-the-dark technology.
And in a land far away, ...
A 2000 mile driverless journey has already started with its first mile in China. The car will drive on highways and, I think, in city traffic in several cities, including Beijing. The wording of the article is somewhat unclear when it comes to urban streets. The company is not Baidu, but Chang'an Automobile. This is a state-owned, no-frills, company.
Since I'm reporting on ambitious plans today, I'll add that Chang'an plans to begin selling driverless cars in 2018. Okay that's my interpretation of the words "put into commercial use." Maybe they are thinking more in terms of taxi pods. Not sure.
Monday, April 11, 2016
US Technology on British Roads Due to British Policies
Oh yes, British enthusiasm and policies are inviting for driverless trials. Google is in talks; pods are scooting around Milton Keynes, a highway driverless pilot is scheduled for 2017, and those not-quite-driverless, but connected truck convoys are going to start showing up on British highways. They're ahead of Munich, Japan, and even China - though China doesn't always advertise its plans and testing.
Anyway, this article from the Telegraph is part journalism/part promotion, but it is crammed with information about various self-driving pilots and the policies in the UK. I have to check out the text of UK laws and regulations. Too busy at the moment.
Lots of trucks all together - no need for bathroom breaks
The European connected-vehicle convoy last week went off so swimmingly that more are in the works. Now it is time, evidently, for the EU bureaucrats to coordinate and make this type of freight transportation possible on an expected-in-the-near-future routine basis.
American ingenuity and technology
We might not be ahead in terms of regulation and laws, but there's still exciting technology advances in the US. Ford is promoting its testing of driverless-in-the-dark LIDAR tests. Looking good. Oh, it's too dark to see.
Don't get me started about how US regulators and lawmakers, with some exceptions, seem more freaked out than welcoming. California legislators are waking up and are not happy with the super conservative (with a small "c") CalTrans draft driverless regulations. The state lawmakers don't want to kiss Google goodbye; nor do they want to relinquish their lead in this field.
Anyway, this article from the Telegraph is part journalism/part promotion, but it is crammed with information about various self-driving pilots and the policies in the UK. I have to check out the text of UK laws and regulations. Too busy at the moment.
Lots of trucks all together - no need for bathroom breaks
The European connected-vehicle convoy last week went off so swimmingly that more are in the works. Now it is time, evidently, for the EU bureaucrats to coordinate and make this type of freight transportation possible on an expected-in-the-near-future routine basis.
American ingenuity and technology
We might not be ahead in terms of regulation and laws, but there's still exciting technology advances in the US. Ford is promoting its testing of driverless-in-the-dark LIDAR tests. Looking good. Oh, it's too dark to see.
Don't get me started about how US regulators and lawmakers, with some exceptions, seem more freaked out than welcoming. California legislators are waking up and are not happy with the super conservative (with a small "c") CalTrans draft driverless regulations. The state lawmakers don't want to kiss Google goodbye; nor do they want to relinquish their lead in this field.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Singapore vs. North Dakota vs. Google vs. ...
Singapore + nuTonomy = Pod-mania
OMG, the twittersphere and conventional journalism - here, via Forbes - are full of Singapore's plan to introduce taxi-pods (taxibots?). These will be accessible by apps. How else, right? (Not quicker, by the way, than catching a cab on CPW in Manhattan.) This could beat Uber at its own game and get a leg up on shared-use plans by Google, GM, Ford, and others.
Google stays out West
Google is bringing its cute driverless vehicles to Phoenix, Arizona. Who wants to be there? No offense, but it' not a pedestrian-friendly place. Maybe it's just my East Coast sensibilities. Google says there's good air-born dust, as in dust storms. I was there for one once and it was creepy. Thank goodness someone else was driving.
North Dakota to have driverless highway? Every hardly-any-people state has two senators
One weird aspect of the US Constitution is that every state, no matter how small and no matter how few people, gets two senators. Hence a state like Wyoming, which has a population the size of a Brooklyn neighborhood, gets somewhat outsize representation. In a way, this is a good thing. Some of those senators are able to push through interesting ideas and not get swamped by the more populous states.
North Dakota (pop. a bit under 750,000) Sen. John Thune is backing an idea to allow a particular highway that runs north-to-south and goes through seven states to be the first to allow driverless hauling of freight. Lots of driverless trucks. There's an association formed to push the idea toward fruition, the Central North Trade Corridor Association.
This would mean seven states permitting driverless travel, whether through laws, regulations, or pure neglect. It could just mean interpreting existing provisions to not require a human driver. They're all laissez-faire/no-government-intervention out West, (super broad generalization there) so maybe that could happen.
Truck trip success in Europe
Speaking of a trucking company fantasy, a convoy of connected trucks - lorries, to those of you in the UK - has completed a trip across Europe. I think the first truck needs a driver, but the followers do not, though, of course, there were drivers present during this test. I'm not sure what happens to the CV trucks when obnoxious, speeding drivers of cars weave into the middle of the convoy. That will be the New Jersey Turnpike test.
Volvo going to China
First, Volvo is now owned by a Chinese company. Second, Chinese companies are pushing for their government to establish driverless-friendly rules. Third, China presents good challenges for driverless vehicles, as in crazy congestion and drivers. Volvo plans to essentially give 100 ordinary people 100 driverless vehicles to test on urban Chinese roads. I think the drivers must be present and they will be able to take over the wheel. This pilot will not happen until 2017.
NHTSA and technical details that make driverless possible
Tomorrow, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will be hosting a public meeting at the USDOT (Department of Transportation) building. One of those details is the technology that allows driverless vehicles to "see" its surroundings and "communicate" - as in connected vehicles or CV - with others. It will be interesting because DOT announced it will come out with regulations within the next few months. Okay, I remember that, but I don't have a link right now. That is warp speed for a government agency.
OMG, the twittersphere and conventional journalism - here, via Forbes - are full of Singapore's plan to introduce taxi-pods (taxibots?). These will be accessible by apps. How else, right? (Not quicker, by the way, than catching a cab on CPW in Manhattan.) This could beat Uber at its own game and get a leg up on shared-use plans by Google, GM, Ford, and others.
Google stays out West
Google is bringing its cute driverless vehicles to Phoenix, Arizona. Who wants to be there? No offense, but it' not a pedestrian-friendly place. Maybe it's just my East Coast sensibilities. Google says there's good air-born dust, as in dust storms. I was there for one once and it was creepy. Thank goodness someone else was driving.
North Dakota to have driverless highway? Every hardly-any-people state has two senators
One weird aspect of the US Constitution is that every state, no matter how small and no matter how few people, gets two senators. Hence a state like Wyoming, which has a population the size of a Brooklyn neighborhood, gets somewhat outsize representation. In a way, this is a good thing. Some of those senators are able to push through interesting ideas and not get swamped by the more populous states.
North Dakota (pop. a bit under 750,000) Sen. John Thune is backing an idea to allow a particular highway that runs north-to-south and goes through seven states to be the first to allow driverless hauling of freight. Lots of driverless trucks. There's an association formed to push the idea toward fruition, the Central North Trade Corridor Association.
This would mean seven states permitting driverless travel, whether through laws, regulations, or pure neglect. It could just mean interpreting existing provisions to not require a human driver. They're all laissez-faire/no-government-intervention out West, (super broad generalization there) so maybe that could happen.
Truck trip success in Europe
Speaking of a trucking company fantasy, a convoy of connected trucks - lorries, to those of you in the UK - has completed a trip across Europe. I think the first truck needs a driver, but the followers do not, though, of course, there were drivers present during this test. I'm not sure what happens to the CV trucks when obnoxious, speeding drivers of cars weave into the middle of the convoy. That will be the New Jersey Turnpike test.
Volvo going to China
First, Volvo is now owned by a Chinese company. Second, Chinese companies are pushing for their government to establish driverless-friendly rules. Third, China presents good challenges for driverless vehicles, as in crazy congestion and drivers. Volvo plans to essentially give 100 ordinary people 100 driverless vehicles to test on urban Chinese roads. I think the drivers must be present and they will be able to take over the wheel. This pilot will not happen until 2017.
NHTSA and technical details that make driverless possible
Tomorrow, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will be hosting a public meeting at the USDOT (Department of Transportation) building. One of those details is the technology that allows driverless vehicles to "see" its surroundings and "communicate" - as in connected vehicles or CV - with others. It will be interesting because DOT announced it will come out with regulations within the next few months. Okay, I remember that, but I don't have a link right now. That is warp speed for a government agency.
Monday, April 4, 2016
Not News: Singapore Becoming Smart and More Mobile
Singapore is quickly becoming a smart city/new urbanist's dream. Officials are talking smart lamp posts that provide light, cameras, and maybe data collection.
Some restaurants already feature robot wait staff. I'm guessing they refuse tips.
Driverless pods are being designed to solve the first mile/last mile challenges of transit. These should be on the roads within two years.
There's a nice ethos here of coordination, transit, and a government embracing change.
I actually would like to have human waiters and waitresses, even if the service is inconsistent.
Some restaurants already feature robot wait staff. I'm guessing they refuse tips.
Driverless pods are being designed to solve the first mile/last mile challenges of transit. These should be on the roads within two years.
There's a nice ethos here of coordination, transit, and a government embracing change.
I actually would like to have human waiters and waitresses, even if the service is inconsistent.
Friday, April 1, 2016
No Driver in Vehicle Next to You - On the DC Beltway and in Scotland
Two pretty quiet but big developments as the world edges ever closer to the Age of Driverless.
1. The first privately-owned Google driverless vehicle has been purchased by the Scottish "ideas agency" company Equator. This is not a test. The driverless car will be ferrying actual people, staff and clients (not Google-paid "drivers") that is, from Equator offices in Finnieston (not sure if that's a different town or a neighborhood) to the Glasgow offices of its sister design agency 999.
2. The Capital Beltway, the road that practically defines the inner and outer people and areas of the Washington, DC, region, hosted a driverless test of a large vehicle, in regular traffic. No video of this driverless trip has been released. The company doing the test was AiNET, based in Beltsville, MD, right by the Beltway. The now self-driving vehicle was a reclaimed 1991 Amertek Aircrash Rescue and Fire Fighting vehicle. Yes, a fire truck that drives itself. Now all of the firefighters can wave to passersby. Cute vehice, no?
We're talking real traffic
And there is traffic at every time of a weekday on this notorious road. This is a road with lots of road splits and interchanges with other roads, and it is a road that is pretty round, sometimes with a strange shape, sometimes near a building that looks mysteriously similar to the castle in the Wizard of Oz. For trivia's sake, I must mention that for many years, right by that castle (which is actually a Mormon temple, I believe), these words appeared on a Beltway overpass: Surrender Dorothy.
This test was a 50-mile trip in Maryland on the Beltway and then through neighborhoods and into Washington, DC, into such tony, fashionable areas as Georgetown, Capital Hill, and Shaw, which is gentrifying from hipster to fashionable.
1. The first privately-owned Google driverless vehicle has been purchased by the Scottish "ideas agency" company Equator. This is not a test. The driverless car will be ferrying actual people, staff and clients (not Google-paid "drivers") that is, from Equator offices in Finnieston (not sure if that's a different town or a neighborhood) to the Glasgow offices of its sister design agency 999.
2. The Capital Beltway, the road that practically defines the inner and outer people and areas of the Washington, DC, region, hosted a driverless test of a large vehicle, in regular traffic. No video of this driverless trip has been released. The company doing the test was AiNET, based in Beltsville, MD, right by the Beltway. The now self-driving vehicle was a reclaimed 1991 Amertek Aircrash Rescue and Fire Fighting vehicle. Yes, a fire truck that drives itself. Now all of the firefighters can wave to passersby. Cute vehice, no?
We're talking real traffic
And there is traffic at every time of a weekday on this notorious road. This is a road with lots of road splits and interchanges with other roads, and it is a road that is pretty round, sometimes with a strange shape, sometimes near a building that looks mysteriously similar to the castle in the Wizard of Oz. For trivia's sake, I must mention that for many years, right by that castle (which is actually a Mormon temple, I believe), these words appeared on a Beltway overpass: Surrender Dorothy.
This test was a 50-mile trip in Maryland on the Beltway and then through neighborhoods and into Washington, DC, into such tony, fashionable areas as Georgetown, Capital Hill, and Shaw, which is gentrifying from hipster to fashionable.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)