Are Robotic Trucks and Driverless Cars Coming to Take You Away?
If the robots are going to kill us, most people would like some insight into what the odds are.
There were two significant developments this week addressing the future of transportation.
One involved worker rights for drive share companies and the other seeks to save worker jobs in the freight hauling business. Both are connected to a future where computers will do the driving.
***
Proposition 22, the gig economy law foisted on California voters by ride-hailing and delivery companies was largely upheld by the 1st District Court of Appeal. Advocates for the measure spent more than $200 million to overturn the effects of AB 5 in determining the classification of app driven employees.
The court’s ruling allows gig economy companies to define their workforces as independent contractors, eliminating employee benefits such as minimum wage, overtime and workers’ compensation in case of injury. I won’t tell you what the companies promised in return to drivers except to say it mostly didn’t happen.
This case will be appealed to the Supreme Court which will affirm the decision, either by refusing to hear it or rendering a decision even more damaging to workers who drive for a living.
Ultimately, the real import of this court decision is that companies have some money-saving breathing room while they await a future with no drivers needed.
***
A battle over AB 316, legislation requiring human drivers inside robotic trucks, has moved into high gear. The autonomous vehicle industry has united in opposing the law, and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is rallying to convince pro-Labor representatives to support the measure.
Assembly members Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D) and Tom Lackey (R), introduced the bill in the wake of the DMV announcing it would develop regulations to let companies test driverless 18-wheelers and other vehicles weighing over 10,001 pounds.
The first hearing on AM 316 will be next Monday. Assembly Transportation Committee Chair Laura Friedman told reporters:
“The idea of having very large, potentially destructive and heavy vehicles moving very rapidly on our streets without a driver behind the wheel at this point seems like it’s, like the technology may not be ready..”
The measure will need at least eight votes in favor to advance on to the floor of the legislature, where Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers.
California law will inform legislatures in other states. It’s key to how fast and how far regulations for autonomous trucks will progress. At present, twenty-two states allow autonomous vehicles — both light-duty cars and trucks — on the road, according to the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association.
The difference involved with this piece of legislation is whether or not drivers will be required as a safety measure, should computers fail or get confused by traffic conditions.
This bill wouldn’t prevent companies from testing their technology. But it would make the potentially lucrative commercial trucking market a nonstarter for the foreseeable future for California.
While there are more than a handful of companies developing electric heavy duty trucks, the release of Tesla’s Semi trucks, which feature Level 8 automation which should eliminate the need for a driver.
Thirty six of those semis were delivered to Frito-Lay in Modesto last year and have been undergoing trial runs. There have been eight incidents where the load ended up behind a tow truck. Like so much of what Elon Musk does, these early results indicate they’re not ready for prime time.
There’s also the problem with these particular vehicles about the amount of freight they’ll carry, which is why the first test involves moving potato chips.
In short, there is much we don’t know about the safety involved with autonomous systems, while makers are under increasing pressure to come to market quickly.
From the Associated Press:
A YouTube video from last year highlighted the unpredictability of the new technology inside autonomous trucks, potentially fueling fears of the public and presenting a PR nightmare for the industry. The video shows a large truck engineered with TuSimple Holdings Inc. software suddenly veering to the left, crossing a lane, and running into the concrete center divider, narrowly avoiding another vehicle. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration earlier this month closed its investigation into the incident, and TuSimple has made improvements to its systems as a result of the accident, the company said.
Beyond such viral moments, the autonomous truck debate also comes at a dismal time for the industry. Two companies focused on driverless-truck technology, Embark LLC and Waymo, recently announced layoffs of more than 200 employees in the Bay Area. The downsizing is in part the result of the slower than expected commercialization of capital-intensive technology, Farrah of the autonomous vehicle industry group said.
The City of San Francisco has several years of experience in this field, with automated vehicles from Waymo (Owned by Google) and Cruise (Owned by General Motors) having permission to operate under limited circumstances.
Both companies are seeking to expand operations (Cruise will operate a full taxi service), and the city government wants to slow them down.
Traffic jams being caused by inoperative autonomous vehicles are proving to be irresistible for tv news crews on the prowl for “live action” stories.
There is an ongoing concern about the autos driving too fast for road conditions, but it’s hard to tell how often this occurs because the companies have been less-than-forthcoming about problems they encounter. Passengers who fall asleep while being transported have awoken to encounters with emergency personnel because the robot brain assumed they were in distress or dead.
The ability of automated systems to respond to unexpected conditions is actually easier to fix than human error, since (in theory) one programming fix would apply to all vehicles using that system. People, on the other, are unpredictable, and prone to failing to learn from experience.
Make no mistake about it, the time of autonomous driverless vehicles is coming. The question is do we want to take the word of people who’ve gambled heavily and are looking for a payout OR do we insist on a testing system that permits full disclosure.
If the robots are going to kill us, most people would like some insight into what the odds are.
I remain concerned that there is not enough thought being given to the 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. who will find their opportunities fading as the road robots take over.
Are we as a society going to allow yet another situation related to change where the social costs of change are dumped onto government? What’s that saying…Privatize profits & socialize losses?
I suppose it’s worthwhile to throw another curveball into the mix, namely the scenario envisioned by SciFi writer Cory Doctorow in Attack Surface, where the control of robot cars is seized by bad guys to cause chaos and kill off a few “enemies.”
****
You can follow me at:
Twitter (for now)---> @DougPorter506
Post —→DougPorter@wordsdeedsblogger
Tribel ——> DougP Porter@dougporter506
Mastodon ——> DougPorter506@mastodon.social
NEW! –Spoutible —>@dougporter506
Facebook —----> https://www.facebook.com/WordsAndDeedsBlog
Email me at: WritetoDougPorter@Gmail.com