Safe Speed Forums

The driverless cars experiment will come to a grinding halt now that, as reported in the Times yesterday, the person in the car who would normally be driving will still be responsible in the event of a collision. They are supposed to take over control in the even of an unforeseen incident.

While this is the only decision that the Government legislators could have come to in view of the liability nightmare that is this technology, it will have the effect of making everyone decide that if they are taking the blame then they might as well drive themselves and be in control.

The real issue is not the technology but the legal liability. The classic example being a robot car which swerves to avoid a pedestrian but in doing so careers into a bus queue.

I sincerely hope that the people designing driverless cars also understand the cussedness of teenagers who will, for example, deliberately step out in front of them to see them emergency brake and swerve around.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

One of the key benefits of driverless cars was supposed to be that they could take someone to their destination in a city centre and then go off independently to park somewhere else, thus greatly reducing the need for city-centre car parks. If they're not allowed to travel without a "driver" they're pretty pointless. Also, if the "driver" is expected to suddenly take control in the event of a potential collision they won't be able to read a book or work on a laptop while travelling, which was another claimed benefit.

Not to mention it driving you home from the pub

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed