[blindlaw] A different view of Driverless cars

[Justin Young]

Hi All,

I've not been following this thread that closely, but I'm curious of
the progress of the Blind Driver program.  I am curious to wonder if
the car created for the blind will ever reach the streets?  Can it
recognize street lights/stop signs?  I know if possible I sure would
use one if it ever came on the market.  Thanks so much

Justin

On 8/23/13, Bill Reif <billreif at ameritech.net> wrote:
> Hello Dan,
>
> I know liability will remain with the vehicle manufacturer, just as is
> the case now where defects in conventional vehicles are alleged to have
> contributed to accidents, and didn't intend to assert otherwise. So long
> as whoever is in the front seat of an autonomous vehicle has some power
> to intervene, lawyers will allege that their failure to do so creates
> liability with the operator as well unless that person had no power to
> influence the car. In the case of the blind, it will be argued that the
> person should never have put him/herself in that situation. That might
> be a valid argument if the vehicle includes no technology that would
> have provided situational awareness information.
>
> Cordially,
> Bill
>
> On 8/23/2013 11:47 AM, Daniel McBride wrote:
>> Bill:
>>
>> Unless specific legislation was passed to exempt manufacturers of a
>> driverless vehicle from liability in personal injury/wrongful death
>> cases,
>> products liability issues are going to be a concern of the potential
>> manufacturers.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Bill
>> Reif
>> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:54 AM
>> To: Blind Law Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A different view of Driverless cars
>>
>> This debate validates the time and money the NFB has put into the
>> blind-drivable vehicle. Even if that vehicle is displaced by the
>> driverless
>> car and never gains significant distribution, its successful operation
>> demonstrates that we can monitor and, if necessary, intervene in its
>> operation. Without that demonstration, we would find it harder to
>> challenge
>> the belief that we are as powerless as inanimate cargo. As driverless
>> cars
>> continue to evolve, we should work with developers to interface some of
>> the
>> blind-drivable technology in those a blind person may operate. Until that
>> happens or until the driverless car is perfected, I would no more want to
>> ride in one than a sighted person would sit in a car with no controls.
>>
>> In terms of legal issues: I can't imagine that a car's being "driverless"
>> shifts liability away from whoever's behind the wheel.
>>
>> Cordially,
>> Bill
>>
>> On 8/19/2013 6:29 PM, Ross Doerr wrote:
>>> About two weeks ago on this list I posted some material about Google's
>>> driverless car along with some legal and ethical questions that go
>>> "along for the ride" as it were.
>>> Lest  we think that Google is the sole company putting a car like this
>>> out there in testing, read the following article about its competition
>>> at:
>>> 	
>>> http://www.wbur.org/npr/212683617/hitting-the-road-without-a-driver?ft
>>> =3&f=2
>>> 12683617
>>> Note two things in this article that I, as well as many others on the
>>> list have verbalized.
>>> The manufacturers of this car are also concerned about the car and its
>>> automation being accepted by the general public as well as them
>>> waiting for the legal profession and insurance industry to catch up with
>> them.
>>> This car has a "big red button"  in the middle of the dashboard which,
>>> when activated, disconnects the automatics operating the car. This is
>>> not surprising.
>>>    My point is that the legal and insurance issues for driverless cars
>>> are now being outlined and debated, and we are not a part of this
>>> debate. Debating those issues on this list is one thing, but we are not
>> the decision makers.
>>> We need to be a part of the debate at the discussion level so that
>>> policy can be shaped in such a way that we are not excluded at the
>>> outset.
>>> That is a statement that is very easily said, and not so easily done.
>>> Ross A. Doerr, Attorney at law
>>> Augusta, Maine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/billreif%40ameri
>>> tech.net
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dlmlaw%40sbcglobal.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/billreif%40ameritech.net
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jty727%40gmail.com
>