Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Some of the car makers are trying to answer this question: 'Volvo says it will accept full liability for accidents involving its driverless cars, making it "one of the first" car companies to do so.' http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34475031 rik. On 9 Jun 2016, 11:33 +1000, David

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

David Lochrin wrote: Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be > responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? A company has responsibilities if your electric kettle explodes, or your new fence falls on a passing pedestrian. It's not a new

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

At 11:28 AM 9/06/2016, David Lochrin wrote: >Stephen & Mike raise a really excellent question (below). Only a human can >assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be responsible for a death >caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? I had the same question when I read about the

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Stephen & Mike raise a really excellent question (below). Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? Candidates include the pollies who mandated use of the technology, the executives of the

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-08 17:49 Chris Johnson wrote: > There are too many posts to quote from - but consider, just on whether all > cars should have a self-driving function. Two cases: > > 1. If arterial roads such as the Sydney M5 Eastern Distributor/Hume Highway > mandated hands-off driving only - and

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 8/06/2016 10:54 PM, Michael wrote: ... robot drivers will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. ... They're here! Some trucks in WA mines have no driver on-board. There are drivers, but they're thousands of kilometres away, working in air-conditioned safety. The trucks mostly drive

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-08 22:54 Michael wrote: > I am surprised that this technology focussed list is so distraught about the > idea of robot drivers. > > Clearly, based on everything we have seen in the last 40 years, robot drivers > will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. Arguing there is a

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

I am surprised that this technology focussed list is so distraught about the idea of robot drivers. Clearly, based on everything we have seen in the last 40 years, robot drivers will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. Arguing there is a certain set of conditions (road surfaces, types of

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 Jim writes > If the driverless vehicle drives like a dumb but safe driver it could save > a lot of lives, injury and loss ... Like everything else driverless vehicles > will be resisted by some, and taken up happily by others ... Neither the > government or their

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 7/06/2016 12:00 PM, link-requ...@mailman.anu.edu.au wrote: > Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 > years time There are too many posts to quote from - but consider, just on whether all cars should have a self-driving function. Two cases: 1. If arterial roads such

[LINK] Productivity Commission opens the door for mobile alternative to USO

I'd have thought the USO should cover mobile in addition to, rather than instead of, fixed line. In this day and age, data services should also be included. -- David Boxall