Interesting. There are permits for "testing with a driver" (about 20 of those), and "testing without a driver" (only 2), "deployment for public use" (none so far), and "autonomous delivery trucks" (none listed).
The CA DMV's requirements for testing with a driver read a lot like those for a learner's permit - must have licensed driver in vehicle, no commercial use, no large vehicles. Testing without a driver has more requirements, although it's mostly self-certification. DMV doesn't require a road test.
Here's the form for applying for testing without a driver.[1] It's all pretty straightforward. If you actually have technology to do the job reliably, it's not going to be a problem. Uber used to complain that California was too restrictive for them to test here, until they ran down a pedestrian in Arizona. DMV seems to be doing a good job of sorting out the working technology from the fake-it-til-you-make-it crowd.
you also need to own more than 25 registered motor vehicles and a five million dollar surety bond.
interesting bits...
> a manufacturer shall report within 10 days after the collision, any collision originating from the operation of the autonomous vehicle that resulted in property damage, bodily injury or death.
10 days? why not 10 hours? these manufacturers ideally know at all times where each vehicle is and what its doing, and a police report takes about 20 minutes.
This imposes the same rules on machines / manufacturers as humans. Seems right for this phase of development. If this whole driverless cars thing works out hopefully the machines can do better than humans. They can sit on hold for longer at least.
Bonds (IMO) are similar to fast food franchise fees. They do a decent job of weeding out the majority of those that cut corners. 25 doesn’t seem all that high....Would be interesting to see what the # of registered vehicles is for each Fortune 500 (would be curious to see if dmv sold that info).
you also need to own more than 25 registered motor vehicles and a five million dollar surety bond.
The OL 311 application form and 13 CCR § 227.04(c) say you have to provide one of insurance, self-insurance, or a surety bond. The requirement to have 25 vehicles applies only to self-insurance, as for any other self-insurer.
PR team has to work around the clock on how to spin this. People really blow up anything related to self driving, even when others are at fault most of the time.
Waymo has more competition with Cruise, Aurora, and Argo than what Uber/Lyft is trying.
I've heard that Uber ATG is barely staying afloat and Lyft is just pumping money just as a desperate attempt (their platform is much more powerful, which is what they're betting on).
To me the issue is that Tesla seems to be shooting for the moon, trying to do it all in one shot, rather than its on rails method that we have seen from other manufacturers. By on rails I mean only on very accurately mapped routes with no deviation.
I would not trust my car with my eyes closed, I do however trust it with supervision which still is a major relief from the stress of driving.
One issue that seems being dodged is, my current software and hardware allows the cars too represent stop signs, traffic lights, cones, and oddly trashcans. Guess what is missing, speed limit signs. The suspicion is that MobileEye holds the patent and either Tesla won't pay for it or MobileEye won't license it. So how you can have a self driving car that cannot recognize speed limit signs is not evident to me; road data is not complete.
Tesla don't need one of these because they're starting out "with driver" for FSD. Like they do for AutoPilot, the driver is expected to take control if the vehicle is doing something unexpected.
[+] [-] Animats|6 years ago|reply
The CA DMV's requirements for testing with a driver read a lot like those for a learner's permit - must have licensed driver in vehicle, no commercial use, no large vehicles. Testing without a driver has more requirements, although it's mostly self-certification. DMV doesn't require a road test.
Here's the form for applying for testing without a driver.[1] It's all pretty straightforward. If you actually have technology to do the job reliably, it's not going to be a problem. Uber used to complain that California was too restrictive for them to test here, until they ran down a pedestrian in Arizona. DMV seems to be doing a good job of sorting out the working technology from the fake-it-til-you-make-it crowd.
[1] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/63d33316-895a-474c...
[+] [-] briga|6 years ago|reply
I swear there are more than 20 self-driving cars driving around the streets of Silicon Valley.
[+] [-] nimbius|6 years ago|reply
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/?1dmy&urile=wcm:path:/dmv_...
you also need to own more than 25 registered motor vehicles and a five million dollar surety bond.
interesting bits...
> a manufacturer shall report within 10 days after the collision, any collision originating from the operation of the autonomous vehicle that resulted in property damage, bodily injury or death.
10 days? why not 10 hours? these manufacturers ideally know at all times where each vehicle is and what its doing, and a police report takes about 20 minutes.
[+] [-] trollian|6 years ago|reply
This imposes the same rules on machines / manufacturers as humans. Seems right for this phase of development. If this whole driverless cars thing works out hopefully the machines can do better than humans. They can sit on hold for longer at least.
[+] [-] caro_douglos|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wsh|6 years ago|reply
The OL 311 application form and 13 CCR § 227.04(c) say you have to provide one of insurance, self-insurance, or a surety bond. The requirement to have 25 vehicles applies only to self-insurance, as for any other self-insurer.
[+] [-] gjs278|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sdan|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gkoberger|6 years ago|reply
Waymo is owned by Google (well, Alphabet), and is looking to compete with Uber/Lyft.
Nuro is backed by Softbank, and is looking to start with food/grocery deliveries.
[+] [-] sdan|6 years ago|reply
I've heard that Uber ATG is barely staying afloat and Lyft is just pumping money just as a desperate attempt (their platform is much more powerful, which is what they're betting on).
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] enahs-sf|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shivetya|6 years ago|reply
To me the issue is that Tesla seems to be shooting for the moon, trying to do it all in one shot, rather than its on rails method that we have seen from other manufacturers. By on rails I mean only on very accurately mapped routes with no deviation.
I would not trust my car with my eyes closed, I do however trust it with supervision which still is a major relief from the stress of driving.
One issue that seems being dodged is, my current software and hardware allows the cars too represent stop signs, traffic lights, cones, and oddly trashcans. Guess what is missing, speed limit signs. The suspicion is that MobileEye holds the patent and either Tesla won't pay for it or MobileEye won't license it. So how you can have a self driving car that cannot recognize speed limit signs is not evident to me; road data is not complete.
[+] [-] jfoster|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trollian|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grecy|6 years ago|reply
With regards to the "first robo taxi deployment"
[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1249210220200550405?s=21
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] spike021|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Proven|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]