Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/artic...ve-me-home

EXCERPT: The Australian National Transport Commission released a report this week that argued that the operators of fully self-driving cars should be exempt from laws that restrict driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. That's right—the NTC doesn't think it should be a problem if the person behind the wheel wants to crack open an ice-cold Foster's as they're whisked away to their destination in an autonomous vehicle.

"One potential barrier to receiving the full benefits of automated vehicles would be to require occupants of automated vehicles, who are not driving, to comply with drink-driving laws," the report notes. "This would create a barrier to using a vehicle to safely drive home after drinking."

Since all self-driving cars still allow their operators to override autonomous systems, the NTC acknowledges that allowing an intoxicated person to ride home in a self-driving car could actually create a greater road-risk if that person decides to take over driving....

MORE: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/artic...ve-me-home

I've always thought that one of the coolest things about autonomous self-driving cars will be how they could revolutionize drunk driving.

Just stagger out of a bar at closing time, stumble into your car, tell it to take you home, then pass out.

Hell of a lot safer than trying to drive the car yourself when you're drunk.

I agree with the Australians that the law shouldn't be trying to prevent robot cars from transporting people who are intoxicated. The law should be promoting it.

I don't know about OZ, but in many US states, there is a "care or control" consideration, which means that a drunk having the keys and simply being in the car could constitute a possible danger...like waking up, still drunk, and deciding to drive. I assume there would have to be a lock out of some sort (breathalyzer?) to prevent even the possibility for driver control.

Since we can't really rely on alcoholics to think ahead, or trust them not to disable voluntary settings once drunk, should all autonomous cars always require a breathalyzer to start?

(Oct 13, 2017 08:12 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Since we can't really rely on alcoholics to think ahead, or trust them not to disable voluntary settings once drunk, should all autonomous cars always require a breathalyzer to start?

There's got to be some safeguard, given the overconfidence of drunks and some of their outlandish antics.

There are probably a lot of other issues, too. Should an autonomous vehicle transport children when there's no adult escorting them-- can it even distinguish a young human? Or tell kidnappers from lawful citizens? Is it equipped to handle parking, toll road and bridge fees when the passenger is snoozing away or eyes closed and earphone oblivious to the surroundings? Is the vehicle receptive to instructions from persons of authority when it gets confused and makes a traffic violation blunder? The digital assistants of some ordinary cars may be pretty chatty, already, but can a self-driving one without even an armless Johnny Cab robot attract the attention of and communicate with a deaf passenger when it becomes necessary? Time will tell...

- - -