There’s by no means a boring second on this trade. The expertise is advancing (see examples right here and right here), authorities rules are being developed (see replace on U.S. rules right here), and new partnerships proceed to be fashioned (e.g., Ford teaming with Walmart and Postmates). New demonstration and testing actions are cropping up every day (see examples right here and right here) and the media continues to cowl all of this with unwavering dedication! It’s an thrilling time.
Business is advancing their pursuits whereas governments – internationally and in any respect ranges – are struggling to maintain up. The query of requirements creeps into lots of the discussions; nevertheless, there was little agreed-upon. The matters that usually are mentioned as needing requirements embrace: security (typically), cybersecurity, knowledge privateness, related automobiles (DSRC), signage, and even requirements on how the automobiles talk with different street customers. These are all big matters independently and the implications of those requirements, most of the time, can have implications for a lot of industries (not simply the driverless trade).
Who ought to set up these requirements? Seemingly, it is sensible for the federal government to take the lead as a impartial third celebration representing the better good. However, trade is getting patents for all facets of the driverless expertise, together with, for instance, pedestrian communication instruments (see hyperlink right here), which may affect requirements. Ford can be creating their very own normal for a way driverless automobiles talk with different street customers, however they’re encouraging the trade to undertake them (see hyperlink right here). There are additionally examples the place authorities works with trade teams and requirements organizations (e.g., related car requirements or cybersecurity framework…not requirements!). And right here’s one other instance: the RAND Company, on the request of Uber’s Superior Expertise Group, developed an “firm impartial framework for AV security” (hyperlink right here).
I’m certain we’ll proceed to see each number of strategies to creating requirements. My hope is that requirements will not be developed too late within the expertise growth course of, the requirements will be agreed-upon by most stakeholders, and that the requirements don’t restrict innovation or development. What are your ideas on how/when requirements ought to be developed?
Be aware: I’ll be on the Client Electronics Present (CES) – will you? Please electronic mail me (firstname.lastname@example.org) in case you’d like to fulfill up!