Feds ease rules for autonomous vehicle testing to compete with China

Domestic AVs can now get FMVSS exemptions for no rearview mirrors or steering wheels.

See full article...

 

[klarg]

Remember the ‘missile gap?’
Now we have the ‘self-driving gap.’
Alarmist manipulation is a classic.

 

[s73v3r]

Now its an 'Orange man bad' reaction slack channel?

BECAUSE HE IS FUCKING TERRIBLE. You cannot complain that people are saying "Orange man bad" when he objectively is the worst fucking person on the planet to be in charge of anything. There is literally nothing redeemable about him or any of his supporters.

Is the new policy objectively good - yes.

No it fucking isn't. None of these vehicles are ready to operate without a driver. They all should have someone behind the wheel that can take over when an emergency happens.

 

[magneticsponge]

TIL: Deregulation increases safety

Hmmm I seem to remember Stockton Rush from OceanGate saying something similar. I wonder what he’s up to?

Oh wait….

 

[Eldorito]

"This administration understands that we're in a race with China to out-innovate, and the stakes couldn’t be higher," said US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy in a statement. "As part of DOT's innovation agenda, our new framework will slash red tape and move us closer to a single national standard that spurs innovation and prioritizes safety," Duffy said.

I wonder how long until essentially the same quote is used to justify child labour, below minimum wage salaries or invading [insert country here].

Slashing red tape and prioritising safety rarely go hand in hand. I know slashing red tape can be good, but you don't generally use that as part of the same sentence as prioritising safety.

 

[orwelldesign]

Harder whammy than being white AND a woman?

Uh... Yes. And it's crazy to think that isn't true. Pure delusion. "White" is never a disqualifying factor. Except maybe, like, the Compton City council?

 

[jandrese]

Remember the ‘missile gap?’
Now we have the ‘self-driving gap.’
Alarmist manipulation is a classic.

If self driving gets to the point where I don't have to babysit the stupid thing the entire time it is operational that will be a major feature. Current "full self driving" is a party trick IMHO. You can't do anything else while it is active so all it does it make driving even more boring.

 

[Frank C.]

What race??? China is rethinking self-driving. This is all Musk, trying to buy favor with the government.

 

[DarthSlack]

Im not seeing that the specifics as mentioned in the article are such a bad thing. They are keeping their accident reporting standards, except that if no one got hurt then they have 15 days to report it to NHTSA. And the part about robotaxis not needing rear view mirrors or foot pedals seems like common sense.

The objection is that nobody on the road agreed to these terms, they're being forced on us. Compare to Waymo who had to have drivers in the car at all times when they first started. Given the frequency FSD makes bad decisions, it's only a matter of time before these loosened regulations end up causing dead people. Who didn't consent to being dead at the hands of an automaton.

 

[the cave troll]

 

[Frank C.]

"ARS" in all uppercase is all I need to see to understand the comment and commenter.

Well, it does look visually better in all caps, I've done that time to time.

 

[LucidCG]

Well, he got that part right. Only he went in the wrong direction with it.

The stakes are literal lives of people on and near the roads who did not sign up to be part of this beta test. There will be deaths.

It's okay, they're already born.

 

[arsisloam]

It's an identity politics issue: the first vehicle is an expression of masculinity; the second vehicle is merely utilitarian. You might as well try to ban truck nuts.

I reserve the right guy to laugh my ass off at anyone massively insecure enough to bolt fake testicles to their truck.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

Uh... Yes. And it's crazy to think that isn't true. Pure delusion. "White" is never a disqualifying factor. Except maybe, like, the Compton City council?

So basically, the only thing we're not ready for as a nation is a female president. Black or white.

 

[isidorem]

Some of you are going to die, but that's a price that Musk is willing to pay.

That’s a price that Musk is willing for you to pay. FTFY!

 

[Ushio]

I didn't, and my home state didn't. Half the country didn't vote for this. Let Arizona or Texas kill themselves with this nonsense, but leave me out of it!

Also, I'm not a fan of the "staying at home, didn't vote" angle, because so many states weren't competitive. If the presidential race were decided by popular vote then a lot more people would vote.

A third of the country didn't vote for this not half. A third couldn't be bothered to vote which is basically the same as voting Trump.

 

[Navalia Vigilate]

So autonomous vehicle regulation via lawsuits.

Because that works out well in so many other ways for America.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

Im not seeing that the specifics as mentioned in the article are such a bad thing. They are keeping their accident reporting standards, except that if no one got hurt then they have 15 days to report it to NHTSA. And the part about robotaxis not needing rear view mirrors or foot pedals seems like common sense.

The objection is that nobody on the road agreed to these terms, they're being forced on us.

What specifically in the terms I mentioned did you disagree with and why?

 

[alterationbrick]

We're in a race with China! We have to deregulate! But we're also going to tear down the universities that research autonomous driving, discourage foreign experts from coming to the US, impose tariffs on the semiconductors they use to train self driving algorithms, and ruin the economy to further discourage private companies from investing in R&D.

Good luck!

 

[Derecho Imminent]

A third of the country didn't vote for this not half. A third couldn't be bothered to vote which is basically the same as voting Trump.

It should also be noted that they were warned over and over that that would be the consequence if they did not vote - as was the case in 2016. There is no one of voting age that can say that was before their time.

 

[Kiru]

I'm with you on regulation double standards and I also dislike the obsession with large trucks.

I helped a friend with a small home job a while back, and one of his friends brought his little Suzuki thing just like that one.

That said...when it comes to "is that safe enough to allow on roads," well...he made a point that he almost never drives it on the highway for a reason.

Low speed collisions may be more common, but rear ends and pileups happen on highways. You don't want to be driving a car where your knees are the crumple zones.

Yeah, when I lived in Lagos Nigeria as a kid in the 80's, Suzuki micro-van taxis were everywhere, and would be jammed full of adults trying to get to work. Due to sketchy drivers, they got into accidents often, with predictably gruesome results.

 

[Damnicus]

What (and why) are we "racing" toward?

 

[real mikeb_60]

More expensive fuel may cut down on vehicle growth. Kind of like overseas.

Love some of the possible twists and turns on this road, though.

If the price of oil is pushed down enough by a (short-term) boost in production by all that Beautiful New Fracking^TM, the price of fossil fuels should go down, making those monster vehicles more practical to use.

But if it doesn't, all that "beautiful clean coal" (/s of course) should push electricity prices down (we know it won't) to where EVs are even more cost-effective to use, charging overnight to use the below-cost power available from keeping the coal plants running.

And EVs are (horrors!) heavier than gas/diesel for similar size vehicle because of the battery weight, letting you have even greater road damage by packing more of them into the same space.

The only place where fuel is likely to keep getting more expensive if the intended effect of glutting the petroleum market happens, in the US, is California, where the number of refineries available is dropping (another big one closing next year) so there's no place to convert the crude to gas & diesel. But there are already a lot of EVs on the road there, and if the state decides to support adding to that the loss of fuel supply could be mitigated. There are no pipelines for moving oil & its products from Texas and the Midwest to California (which is one reason for the high prices), but there are pipelines which can (and currently do) support use of natural gas for base load (and some peaking) power production, helping those EVs. So it makes abundant sense for EVs to keep getting support in CA and the West Coast generally even if the rest of the country goes hog wild on Purely Polluting Coal Power (should be another ^TM).

If you can't see all the obvious /s's in there, you're either blind or a right-wing AI. (Yes, I'm having a depressing morning with the news covered by Ars today.)

 

[nafhan]

Cars actually are over regulated though. Its why this is legal
View attachment 108333
but this isn't
View attachment 108334
It makes little sense why 4 wheel vehicles have such strict safety regulations, while 2 and 3 wheel vehicles don't, but can be driven on the same roads as 4 wheel vehicles.

It's less a problem with amount of legislation and more a problem with regulatory capture.

 

[AustinAllan]

When an autonomous car gets into an accident who is responsible, the owner or the manufacturer? That is the critical question.

 

[David Mayer]

I didn't, and my home state didn't. Half the country didn't vote for this. Let Arizona or Texas kill themselves with this nonsense, but leave me out of it!

Also, I'm not a fan of the "staying at home, didn't vote" angle, because so many states weren't competitive. If the presidential race were decided by popular vote then a lot more people would vote.

many states weren't competitive

Are there any states that couldn't have been flipped by those who stayed at home?

 

[ThatEffer]

More expensive fuel may cut down on vehicle growth. Kind of like overseas.

In my experience, that requires a pretty intense jump in fuel cost. Once they hit the market you'd think "Okay, finally some lessons have been learned." But as soon as prices go back down you start seeing the large vehicles again. The U.S. is absolutely committed to driving cartoonishly large vehicles.

 

[lightspd]

1. I think even if the message had just been "Vote Kamala to stop Trump," that's a pretty damn persuasive message. Or it should be, but... here we are.

2. I'm not sure where you were if that was the only message you saw, though. Even the relatively limited bits of campaign advertising I saw (from Canada) focused more on what the Harris team prioritized or planned to do, not what they weren't. Granted, those priorities were often very different from Trump's platform planks, but that's what you get when you have two very different candidates.

3. I am absolutely frustrated with non-voters, since they were the best hope for avoiding this eventuality. I'm also disgusted and angry with Trump voters, yes, but too many of them had bought into the personality cult and weren't likely to change their minds anyhow. But many of the non-voters clearly understood that Trump wasn't a great choice (or they would have voted for him), but were still somehow unwilling to go the final step of voting for the only viable alternative.

It's a vast oversimplification, but I see it as each voter almost having two potential votes (in a two-party system): you can cast a vote from one candidate and withhold a vote from the other candidate, or by casting no vote at all you can withhold your vote from both candidates. Non-voters (unless effectively disenfranchised, that's a separate issue) effectively chose not to make a choice, when the choice was between a convicted felon with plans to wreck the country and a well-qualified but imperfect candidate.

There is a special kind of anger with someone who thinks "wow, that guy sounds like really bad news," but then basically sits back to see what happens (not supporting a destructive madman, but not supporting his much more reasonable opponent either). To me it's not less than the anger I have for everyone who thought "wow, he wants to burn everything down and hurt people, and I'm here for it as long as I benefit" (or those who bought into the rhetoric so completely they couldn't see reason), but it's layered with almost betrayal. If someone could see the risk, why wouldn't they cast a vote to prevent it??

Thanks for the detailed reply.

1. I'm just pointing out it was used during trump round 1, didn't seem to work, and people have short memories, so they probably remember it not being that bad.

2. Fair point here, I left the states shortly after Trump got elected the first time and haven't been back, so I only have limited social feed to go off of. I was a lot more isolated than I am now.

People can be upset by the non voters, I just don't think the level of anger thrown at them is helpful. I think all it will do is drive them to vote for a 3rd part next election and get people no where. Rolling stones had a decent article about non-voters

I also find it strange people assume non-voters could see the risk, though I'm sure some did, my own opinion is that many are probably just hardworking people too busy in their own lives to think it was going to be that bad. Again, they look back on Trump's first term and think it was bad, just not burn everything down bad(Outside Jan 6), but I'm just saying his overall term. Like I also said though, I left the US shortly after he got elected and saw the world, some good and some really shitty places.

Honestly, my biggest wish as far as the 2 party system goes would be that the US would get rid of it and expand.

 

[Tonkaman]

Cars actually are over regulated though. Its why this is legal
View attachment 108333
but this isn't
View attachment 108334
It makes little sense why 4 wheel vehicles have such strict safety regulations, while 2 and 3 wheel vehicles don't, but can be driven on the same roads as 4 wheel vehicles.

The top truck is legal because it has several feet of crumple zones to protect you in an accident. The bottom is not because your knees and legs are the crumple zone.

2 and 3 wheel vehicles are a different class of vehicle altogether so it makes sense to handle them differently. 99% of the time they are open motorcycles, though occasionally a startup manufacturer doesn't want the costs of safety so try to claim a 3 wheel truck or car as a motorcycle. Unfortunately there's loopholes in anything if you try hard enough

 

[Derecho Imminent]

When an autonomous car gets into an accident who is responsible, the owner or the manufacturer? That is the critical question.

IANAL but Im fairly sure the owner is. And through him, the insurance corp.

 

[Tonkaman]

That's the thing that keeps surprising me every time I remember it. He won the popular vote. It falsified my belief that Trump supporters were the crazy minority. No matter how much I thought it was obvious Trump is a bad idea, apparently I'm the one in the minority.

He won the popular vote, but it makes sense when you realize that despite that more people voted against him than for him. He didn't win a majority. He won because of our asinine system of elections

 

[Tonkaman]

It's the Auto industry, It's always been like that and no one has ever done anything to really stop it.

Case in point, the automatic windows do not stop if they meet resistance and there's been deaths over the years because if it. It's not flashy enough so congress never passed a safety law on it. It didn't kill enough people, so the car companies simply pay people off instead of recall and restructure of the window mechanism.

Congress / regulators never made it a requirement because the OEMs at the time voluntarily implemented a fix going forward either due to public shaming or fear of lawsuits. It was viewed as legislating a problem that fixed itself. Or at least it was fixed until Tesla came along.

 

[reallynotnick]

Can we now get cars with cameras and internal displays instead of side view mirrors? I’m thinking like the Honda E, not sure how much it would improve drag, but could be nice.

 

[Bob Dobilina]

When an autonomous car gets into an accident who is responsible, the owner or the manufacturer? That is the critical question.

Depends on the color of the driver. No /s.

Let’s be honest a good portion of trumps base wants nothing to do with self driving cars. Heck I bet a large number of them won’t let their wife drive them around. It’s all to further Misk’s interests.

I already see them next Democrat president getting hammered by the GOP for allowing China to take an advantage while they are the ones dismantling science and technology.

 

[poochyena]

2 and 3 wheel vehicles are a different class of vehicle altogether so it makes sense to handle them differently.

but thats the entire point. WHY are they a different class? They can used the exact same roads and go the exact same speeds. Why is it ok for 2 and 3 wheel vehicles to have no crumble zone, but a work truck that barely goes above 55mph requires it?
Why should number of wheel determine this? Wouldn't it be more logical that weight and speed determine how many extra safety features should be required? Crumple zones are MUCH less relevant when talking about low speed driving.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

Can we now get cars with cameras and internal displays instead of side view mirrors? I’m thinking like the Honda E, not sure how much it would improve drag, but could be nice.

This. I love my backup camera and wish that I could turn it on at all times. Better than a rear view, though it wont replace side mirrors.

 

[Dakar]

Lack of sideview mirrors doesn't bother me, but no steering wheel? I hope there's a giant killswitch in its place.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

Lack of sideview mirrors doesn't bother me, but no steering wheel? I hope there's a giant killswitch in its place.

You will need to be more specific or Musk may get the wrong idea.

 

[Jarrex]

Why is every single action of the Trump administration the worst action? Surely, with a government and society as complex as ours, he'd do at least one thing right, even if it's trivial and accidental? Nixon managed to do some things right (e.g., establishing the EPA).

His medical coverage for IVF is one right thing -- even if his motives are completely not right.