I think it’s a great idea to require a human attendant for giant autonomous machinery.
If the company does not provide the attendant, then the public is just going to shoulder that burden.
I am NOT going to protect or respect unattended property like an autonomous truck if it runs off the road or rams my vehicle or is a risk to my own safety, for example.
I’m pretty sure I’d be offended just having to ride behind it on the freeway as it drives precisely the speed limit in all traffic conditions - can’t say for sure until I’ve experienced it though.
I’m pretty sure I’d be offended just having to ride behind it on the freeway as it drives precisely the speed limit in all traffic conditions - can’t say for sure until I’ve experienced it though.
That seems more like a problem with our hypocritical approach to speed limits in this country. Everyone exceeds the speed limit, speed limits are set with speeding in mind, and everyone just accepts that they could, in principle be busted for speeding at any time. That’s a real problem in situations where speed limits are enforced as written.
It’s like this so cops can pull over almost anyone with ‘cause’ and you’re not fixing this problem without their approval, so you’re not fixing this problem. Fabricating cause is the same reason they still use police dogs for drug sniffing despite them only being around 50% accurate.
its a good idea in terms of the public perception, but it doesnt fix the problem that automated trucks were for. one of the biggest reasons why there was a big push for it is because the number of people willing to live the nomadic life of a truck driver is dwindling. by requiring a person to be in the truck more or less keeps that problem a problem.
supplychainquarterly.com
Hot