California bill to have human drivers ride in autonomous trucks is vetoed by governor
California bill to have human drivers ride in autonomous trucks is vetoed by governor
California's Democratic governor has vetoed a bill that would have required human drivers to be on board self-driving trucks.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed a bill to require human drivers on board self-driving trucks, a measure that union leaders and truck drivers said would save hundreds of thousands of jobs in the state.
You're viewing a single thread.
Having a required human driver in the trucks for if/when the self-driving portion of the truck suddenly bugs out or gets into a situation where it cannot get itself free would probably save them a lot of headache and business when suddenly that truck gets into a situation it cannot correct itself.
Hell, we've already seen times when that would've saved lives like the time self driving taxis ended up blocking an ambulance en route.
I wonder if these vehicles could be remotely piloted by a human when they become gridlocked, rather than have someone sitting in the cabin the entire time. Seems like just sitting in an autonomous vehicle while it drives long distances would be a particularly terrible job.
You could get payed to just sleep or play games, seems like a dream job for some people.
But remote controlled driving also seems like a pretty good idea, if it works reliably
that'd be the dream, but the pessimist in me sees the boss installing Spyware, eye tracker software, a sensor in my seat, twice a day video call check ins and a series of beaurocratic tasks that turn it into an 11 hour shift 6 days a week, and in their downtown offices rather than WFH.
Haha geez man, let's hope that's not the future we're getting
I'd love it, I'd go back to school for one
Play so many video games
I think sleeping would negate the purpose though, you need to be able to see when something is wrong and take control of the vehicle
I guess you're right on the sleeping part, might not be the best idea. But I'm sure if the trucking companies could skip sleeping time for trucks and allow the person to sleep while driving. They would 100% do it.
A loud siren/alarm or something could wake you up I guess if something goes wrong or if you're nearing your destination
They can still choose to have someone in the vehicle if that proves to be true.
By vetoing this bill, Newsom has left it up to the companies themselves.
Yes companies will definitely choose to pay more to keep people safe. 🙄
No, companies will want to avoid paying expensive settlements and high insurance premiums which cut into their profits.
Amoral companies will pay for maintenance checks, and will pay for teams to dispatch to trucks when needed because that's much cheaper than compensating the families of those killed by their trucks.
Let's not forget: self-driving cars are already statistically safer than human drivers. A lot of human truckers use meth, and nearly all of them are sleep deprived (which is equivalent to driving drunk according to numerous studies).
The luddites are the ones endangering people.
Ah yes the ol "It's cheaper sometimes to kill a couple people than employ a few more people" argument.
Haven't heard that one in a while.
What is the going rate for a human life these days? 3 Full time employees? 4?
Ah yes the ol "It's cheaper sometimes to kill a couple people than employ a few more people" argument.
That's not what I said, in fact I said the exact opposite of that.
Historically speaking, it's sadly far from uncommon.
They just cross their fingers and hope that it never happens. Companies have a bad habit of deciding that they would keep more money paying for a lawsuit than they would keep by paying employees. If a company is worth billions, a few million is a drop in the bucket.
There's a VERY good reason for many safety regulations. A lot of these regulations have been paid for with blood and death.
I wish we were better as a species, but here we are.
Nah you just accused human drivers of being meth-heads.
And as we all know - the free market provides /s
We weren't talking about them providing anything.
The question was whether businesses want to deal with maintenance issues and liability with no one around, or hire someone to stay on board and address those issues.
A self-interested business is going to want deliveries made on time, and is going to be very avoidant of accidents that would be costly to pay for.
If these problems are serious, they will address them on their own to boost profits. They may have a way to cut costs and address the problem- like contracting AAA to deal with the odd mechanical failure instead of having someone in the vehicle constantly.
This law would have taken away any flexibility to solve the problem, and forced companies to continue paying big expenses to staff the trucks.
Vetoing this law still allows companies to address it that way, but allows them other options if those are more suitable. The company doesn't want to see trucks drive off the side of the road, or pay for crashes.