2015-10-08

2015-10-08

October 08, 2015

US urged to establish nationwide Federal guidelines for autonomous driving

Oct 7 “The US risks losing its leading global position in the development of self-driving cars if it allows a patchwork of varying state laws and regulations to develop, according to Håkan Samuelsson, president and chief executive of Volvo Cars.

      In a speech to be delivered Thursday at a high level seminar
      on self-driving cars organized by Volvo Cars and the Embassy
      of Sweden in Washington DC, Mr Samuelsson will say...

He will urge regulators to work closely with car makers to solve controversial outstanding issues such as questions over legal liability in the event that a self-driving car is involved in a crash or hacked by a criminal third party.

      Mr Samuelsson will clearly state Volvo's position on both of
      these contentious issues.

He will say Volvo will accept full liability whenever one if its cars is in autonomous mode, making it one of the first car makers in the world to make such a promise.

      He will add that Volvo regards the hacking of a car as a
        criminal offense. ...."[Read more](https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en-gb/media/pressreleases/167975/us-urged-to-establish-nationwide-federal-guidelines-for-autonomous-driving)

          Hmmmm...   Fantastic!!!  This will really "shake 'em up".
          I'll be on a panel at this meeting later this morning.
          Can't wait!!!  This is FANTASTIC!!! Alain [See also](http://www.popsci.com/volvo-on-self-driven-car-liability-i-volunteer)

Some other thoughts

        that deserve your

Man Visiting Brooklyn Apartment Building Dies in Elevator Accident

B. Mueller, Oct 2 “The locksmith, visiting friends at a luxury apartment building in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, a few hours before dawn on Friday, stepped into an elevator whose unpredictable jerks and wobbles had occasionally unnerved tenants.

        The door remained open but the elevator plunged to the
        basement, carrying the man, Eran Modan, 37, and four
        friends. They were all afraid, one of the friends said
        later, but only Mr. Modan decided to try stepping out. The
        floor of the basement, now almost level with the cab, was in
        sight.

        In an instant the small elevator shot back up toward the
        lobby, its stainless-steel door still ajar, and Mr. Modan
        only halfway out. His body was crushed between the elevator
        and the basement ceiling and elevator shaft, and he was
        pronounced dead by emergency medical workers.  [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/nyregion/man-killed-in-elevator-accident-in-brooklyn-apartment-building.html?_r=0)Hmmm... Extremely
            unfortunate!! Plus, the automated elevator was at
            fault.  Better inspection and better regulations are
            absolutely necessary but not a cry for bring back the
            human operator.  Unfortunately, we will undoubtedly
            encounter similar tragedies with SmartDrivingCars.
            Hopefully, these tragedies will be so rare but the
            mobility service so compelling that there won't be a cry
            to put the human back in the loop.  Alain

Recompiled Old News :

Half-baked stuff

          that probably doesn't deserve your time:

Driverless robot taxis to be tested in Japanese town

        J. McCurry Oct 5 "Dozens of people in Japan will be whisked
        to the local shops in driverless taxis from next year in an
        experiment with robot technology that could be fully
        commercial by the time Tokyo hosts the Olympics in 2020.

        From March 2016, the taxis will take about 50 residents of
        Fujisawa... from their homes to supermarkets along the
        city's main roads in journeys of about 3km.

      While Japanese developers have faith in the car's GPS, radar
      and stereovision cameras, attendants will sit in the
        driver's seat during the journeys in case human intervention
        is needed, according to media reports...

Read more      Hmmm… I probably should have put this in “Half-baked” because it is half-baked.  If the vehicles are not good enough to do empty vehicle repositioning (travel without anyone in them, then they are NOT robo-Taxis or aTaxis.  They are at best “Level 3 Ubers”.  The benefit of “Level 4 aTaxis” is that they have the opportunity enable public transit to economically serve on-demand low-density “corridors” at any time of the day because labor costs do not have to be incurred.  If the system needs an attendant, then the fundamental business case disappears and we are back to where we are today.  Plus, mobility challenges of Olympic games are associated with congestion and moving large numbers of people at about the same time.  NOT the sort of challenges that automation is geared to address.  At those times, one can afford to have humans in the loop.  Seems like this is not the time to do human subject testing of autonomous driving systems.  Maybe this should be in C’Mon Man!  Alain

###

C’mon Man! (These folks

        didn't get/read the memo)

###

Calendar of

                Upcoming Events:

###

###

November 4-6, 2015http://www.podcarcity.org/siliconvalley

###

http://www.automatedfl.com/our-efforts/florida-automated-vehicles-summit/

###

###

Recent Versions of:

#

###

                              2015

###

“60 Minutes” test-rides Mercedes-Benz self-driving car

Oct 2 “As Google’s driverless cars have logged more then a million miles in the past six years, the rest of the auto industry is racing to keep up. Computer scientist Ralf Herrtwich hits the road with “60 Minutes” correspondent Bill Whitaker to demonstrate Mercedes-Benz’s most advanced self-driving prototype. Watch the full story Sunday on “60 Minutes.”  Watch video and watch 60 minutes on Sunday Oct 4. This is really becoming mainstream.  Congratulations Ralf! Alain 26, 2015

As Volkswagen Pushed to Be No. 1, Ambitions Fueled a Scandal

D. Hakim, Sept 26 “…It is not Volkswagen’s first run-in with regulators over emissions. When the United States began regulating tailpipe pollutants in the 1970s, Volkswagen was one of the first companies caught cheating. It was fined $120,000 in 1973 for installing what became known as a “defeat device,” technology to shut down a vehicle’s pollution control systems. This time, it equipped its vehicles with software that was programmed to fake test results, an action the E.P.A. rebuked in 1998, when it reached a $1 billion settlement with truck-engine manufacturers for doing the same thing…..

                      Cheating on emissions tests solved several
                      issues at once. Not only were drivers rewarded
                      with better mileage and performance, but the
                      automaker also avoided more expensive and
                      cumbersome pollution-control systems.  While
                      Volkswagen cheated behind the scenes, it
                      publicly espoused virtue. This, after all, is
                      the company that used one of the largest
                      advertising arenas in the world, the [Super Bowl, to run a commercial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljI2S7rwZ1Y%20)showing its
                      engineers sprouting angel's wings.

                      ...Confronted again, Volkswagen continued to
                      maintain that there was a problem with the
                      testers, not the vehicles...Government
                      officials then increased the pressure on the
                      company, threatening to withhold approval for
                      its 2016 Volkswagen and Audi diesel models.
                      According to the E.P.A., that is what forced
                      Volkswagen's hand. On Sept. 3, a group of
                      senior engineers admitted what the regulators
                      had suspected: .... " [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/27/business/as-vw-pushed-to-be-no-1-ambitions-fueled-a-scandal.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0)      Hmmm...So

                          UGLY!!! Alain

                              2015

###

###

Automakers Will Make Automatic Braking Systems Standard in New Cars

B. Vlasic, Sept 11 “ Federal regulators said on Friday that 10 automakers had agreed to install automatic braking systems, which use sensors to detect potential collisions, as standard equipment in new vehicles.

                      But the automakers have not set a timetable
                      for the introduction of the systems,
                      ...Anthony Foxx, [the transportation secretary, said](http://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-dot-and-iihs-announce-historic-commitment-10-automakers-include-automatic-emergency) in a
                      prepared statement that emergency braking
                      technology could reduce traffic deaths and
                      injuries.

                      "We are entering a new era of vehicle safety,
                      focusing on preventing crashes from ever
                      occurring, rather than just protecting
                      occupants when crashes happen," Mr. Foxx
                      said....

                      The 10 companies "will work with I.I.H.S. and
                      N.H.T.S.A. in the coming months on the details
                      of implementing their historic commitment,"
                      the National Highway Traffic Safety
                      Administration said in [a statement](http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/nhtsa-iihs-commitment-on-aeb-09112015) (Same

                          as the DoT Statement.)  [Read more](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/business/automakers-will-make-automatic-braking-systems-standard-in-new-cars.html)  Hmmm...
                        This is
                          major because the automakers "had
                          agreed..." rather than "the regulators had
                          required..."  (although  there seems to be
                          a little push-back in that "...had not set
                          a timetable..."  We do know that many are
                          now offering these systems at a modest
                          up-sell.  So there may actually be
                          substance in the announcement.)  What is
                          clear now is that we should all Invest in
                          insurance companies that are creative in
                          insuring these new vehicles!!!  They are
                          going to become so profitable!  Insurance
                          gets the cash benefit of the technology
                          without having to pay for it!!!
                          Wow!!!Congratulations Warren Buffett.  He
                          must have played a role in this.  He
                          stands to benefit so much.  :-)  While
                          trucks are mentioned, (amazing

                              that buses aren't; DoT is SO BAD!!), they

                          seem very much the stepchild.  SO
                          unfortunate! :-(   Alain
                              2015

###

Google’s Driverless Cars Run Into Problem: Cars With Drivers

M. Richtel & C Dougherty, Sept. 1 “ Google, … has run into an odd safety conundrum: humans.

                      Last month, as one of Google's self-driving
                      cars approached a crosswalk, it did what it
                      was supposed to do when it slowed to allow a
                      pedestrian to cross, prompting its "safety
                      driver" to apply the brakes. The pedestrian
                      was fine, but not so much Google's car, which
                      was hit from behind by a human-driven sedan.

                      Google's fleet of autonomous test cars is
                      programmed to follow the letter of the law...
                      Researchers in the fledgling field of
                      autonomous vehicles say that one of the
                      biggest challenges facing automated cars is
                      blending them into a world in which humans
                      don't behave by the book. "The real problem is
                      that the car is too safe," said Donald Norman,
                      director of the Design Lab at the University
                      of California, San Diego, who studies
                      autonomous vehicles. "They have to learn to be
                      aggressive in the right amount, and the right
                      amount depends on the culture."... [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/technology/personaltech/google-says-its-not-the-driverless-cars-fault-its-other-drivers.html?_r=0)      Hmmm...

                          Much of this is good; however, many of the
                          comments about warning systems being
                          turned off and gaps being to large are a
                          result of poor designs and not the real
                          issue here which is that traffic laws have
                          been written to control human drivers and
                          placed in language that will cause human
                          drivers to achieve the desired behavior
                          most of the time or at the critical
                          times.  The law addresses the process to
                          achieve the desired outcome, and not the
                          outcome itself.  For example, one might
                          argue that the fundamental objective of a
                          stop sign at an intersection is to ensure
                          that one proceeds through the intersection
                          only at a time when there is no chance of
                          a collision with traffic in the cars
                          traveling in the thru lanes.  Because of
                          human information processing limitations
                          coming to a complete stop is the
                          parsimonious way for a human to achieve
                          the desired outcome.  (The sight-lines on
                          the approach to the intersection are such
                          that a human driver needs to come to a
                          complete rest so as to be able to "look
                          both ways" and determine that it is safe
                          to proceed.)  If, however, the automated
                          technology enables the automated vehicle
                          to determine that it is safe to proceed
                          prior to coming to a complete stop, why
                          should that vehicle be required to come to
                          a complete stop?

Speed limits are also an issue.  For many, they have little to do with the maximum “safe” speed and their enforcement is totally whimsical.  With automated vehicles we have the opportunity to deliver a safe speed limit which can vary along curves, ramps, time-of-day, school in/out, weather, traffic volume, prevailing conditions, etc.

It would be a shame for the automated driving algorithms to be cloistered by the letters of the existing laws.  Each of these traffic laws need to be examined and be re-cast with a view as being implemented explicitly by the automated technology.  This may well be the most challenging hurdle facing SmartDrivingCars. Alain 2015

Truck Safety Out of the Box from Autonobox

B Simpson, July 19, 2015 “The premise is promising. Develop and market a plug-and-play, forward-avoidance braking system for the heavy vehicle market that can be installed quickly, upgraded regularly, and even transferred from vehicle to vehicle if necessary.

                      The Autonobox System essentially is a second
                      braking system for heavy-duty vehicles that
                      addresses the long-standing problem of brakes
                      that overheat after intense use like a
                      panic-stop or sustained use while going
                      downhill.... [Read more](http://www.driverlesstransportation.com/truck-safety-out-of-the-box-from-autonobox-9450)  Hmmm...A
                          viable after-market retro-fit
                          opportunity.  Alain
                              2015

###

Self-Driving Cars Could Destroy Fine-Based City Government. What’s the Downside?

S. Shackford, July 15 “One of the propelling concepts behind self-driving cars isn’t just innovation for the sake of innovation, leading us to our sci-fi Jetsons future. If successfully implemented, it will make ground travel safer, …Local governments have become increasingly dependent on human screw-ups as a way to raise money. Speeding tickets. DUI citations. Parking violations. Those are all big money-makers for municipalities that could very well go away under a regime of self-driving cars….On top of that, if the theory that self-driving cars will lead people to own fewer cars holds up, revenue from registration fees will drop as well…. Read more Hmmm…  No downside here!  These have to be one of the most regressive tax systems, just behind lotteries and gambling. Governments deserve it, but will save because they will need way police police who now waste way too much of their time enforcing traffic laws.  Police have much better things to do. Wins all around; No Downside! Alain

###

Lipinski Continues Efforts to Keep Cars and Other Transportation Safe from Cyber Attacksin

                      Wake of [Fiat Chrysler Recall](http://www.wsj.com/articles/fiat-chrysler-recalls-1-4-million-vehicles-amid-hacking-concerns-1437751526)

July 28  “…These vulnerabilities pose great risks and the federal government must do more to help protect Americans from these risks.”

Late last year, the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act, originally introduced by Congressmen Lipinski, was signed into law.  The Act increases the security of federal networks and information systems, improves the transfer of cybersecurity technologies to the marketplace, trains a cybersecurity workforce, and coordinates and prioritizes federal cybersecurity research and development efforts.  “ Read more Hmmm…

                          Besides protecting we must also
                          prosecute.  There has to be bad
                          consequences and not notoriety to those
                          that do the nasty deed.  Alain

###

###

###

Center for Automated Road Transportation Safety @ Fort Monmouth is Launched

Monday, July 20, 2015 – “After more than three (3) years of planning and several major meetings the substantive launch the Center for Automated Road Transportation Safety @ Fort Monmouth (CARTS@FM) occurred this week with the establishment of the not-for-profit. (501(c) (6)), New Jersey Corporation.  The mission of this Center is to substantially improve safety on our existing conventional roadway infrastructure through the use of inexpensive automated collision avoidance systems installed on individual vehicles operating harmoniously with conventional vehicles throughout most, if not all, existing roadways.   The scope of CARTS’s mission is across all modes that utilize the nation’s conventional road system: trucks, buses and cars. ..” Read more

###

###

###

Automatic Cars Or Distracted Drivers: We Need Automation Sooner, Not Later

D. Norman 6/4/15 “Imperfect automation, continually getting better? Or distracted drivers, continually getting worse? Choose.

                      I am fearful of the rapid rush toward full
                      automation and have published numerous
                      articles about the difficulties we will face
                      because of the mismatch of the automation and
                      human behavior. However, I am even more
                      fearful of the rapid rise of distracting
                      devices installed in automobiles, mounted on
                      dashboards, worn on the wrist or body, or
                      carried on seats, pockets, and laps of
                      drivers...Each day seems to bring a new
                      distraction. Heads-up displays (HUDs) that
                      once were aids to minimizing distraction by
                      making it easier for the driver to see
                      navigation aids and speed, are now catching
                      featuritis, that deadly disease which corrupts
                      products...."  [Read more](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/automatic-cars-distracted-drivers-we-need-automation-sooner-norman)

Hmmm….

                          Yup!!  Plus more comments from Don... "You might also want to
                            add your traditional sarcasm saying "He
                            saw the light!" or something because up
                            to now, I have been arguing for caution
                            (including my keynote at last years
                            automated Vehicles conference (where I
                            met you) -- it's about to be published
                            in the proceedings.  And I have a tech
                            review article about to come out arguing
                            the same caution (except I was just able
                            to add a paragraph saying that all my
                            words of caution are correct, but we
                            still should switch to automation
                            quickly).

                            The most dangerous part of automated
                            vehicles is when they are partially
                            automated: the better the automation,
                            the less able a person is able to take
                            corrective action. This is a point I
                            have argued for since my early work on
                            aviation safety some 20 years ago but
                            has been part of the human factors
                            literature since long before that ([Bainbridge](http://www.bainbrdg.demon.co.uk/)Hmmm...it
                              would not be bad to re-read the [1983 paper](https://www.ise.ncsu.edu/nsf_itr/794B/papers/Bainbridge_1983_Automatica.pdf).).  So we have to
                            skip this stage if at all possible.  I
                            have long argued that we should have
                            either all or none. it is the mixture
                            that is dangerous.

                            Basically, we have not solved the human
                            element yet. By this I mean the
                            pedestrians, bicyclists, skateboards,
                            manually driven cars that will always be
                            an issue. Moreover they will game the
                            system: deliberately ignoring the cars
                            under the assumption that they are
                            programmed not to hit them, so they can
                            do anything they want.

                            This assumption will both stall traffic,
                            create roadblocks, and also occasionally
                            prove to be false (automated cars cannot
                            overcome the laws of physics).

                            Another complexity is aggression.
                            Drivers have to be aggressive to get
                            through traffic, but the amount and form
                            of aggression is cultural. Pedestrians
                            behave differently on college campuses
                            (they think they own the place) versus
                            the same people just a few miles away in
                            cities, where they are more lawful.
                            Korean drivers have to be aggressive to
                            merge. And in China or Vietnam or India?
                            Wow.

                            Milan drivers are the most lawful I have
                            experienced recently, but even they lose
                            their patience." Alain

###

Rep. Lipinski Introduces Future Transportation Research and Innovation Act

I. Sancken 03/29/15, “Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL-3) has introduced H.R. 2886, the Future Transportation Research and Innovation for Prosperity (TRIP) Act, to support innovative technologies that have the potential to fundamentally alter mobility in America and beyond.

                      "Surface transportation used to be rather
                      staid and unimaginative, but today the very
                      concept of 'mobility' is being reinvented
                      through research, innovation, and
                      entrepreneurship," said Rep. Lipinski.
                      "Rapidly advancing automation, connectivity,
                      and information technologies are creating
                      incredible opportunities for transportation
                      innovation. We need to develop innovative ways
                      to improve safety, ease congestion, improve
                      personal mobility, and cut energy use..."  [Read more](http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/la-grange/community/chi-ugc-article-rep-lipinski-introduces-future-transportatio-2015-06-29-story.html#page=1)  Hmmm...
                          Excellent!  Alain

MOSI debuts nation’s first driverless vehicle open to public

D. Dangerfield, 6/12/15 “ Imagine a vehicle that can drive on its own. On Saturday, the public will be invited to take a ride in one.  The new driverless Meridian Shuttle is part of an exhibit that opens at MOSI on Saturday. The vehicle allows up to eight people to ride around the first floor of the museum.  Read more  Hmmm… It is all about starting. Congratulations! Alain

                              2015

###

NTSB Calls for Immediate Action on Collision Avoidance Systems for Vehicles; Cites Slow Progress as Major Safety Issue

6/8/15 “ WASHINGTON – In a report released today, the National Transportation Safety Board outlined the life-saving benefits of currently available collision avoidance systems, and recommended that the technology become standard on all new passenger and commercial vehicles.

                      "You don't pay extra for your seatbelt," said
                      Chairman Christopher A. Hart. "And you
                      shouldn't have to pay extra for technology
                      that can help prevent a collision
                      altogether."... [Read more](http://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20150608b.aspx)  Hmmm
                        Yea!!!  Finally some semblance of
                          sanity in Washington.  Alain

###

###

John F. Nash Jr., Math Genius Defined by a ‘Beautiful Mind,’ Dies at 86

E. Goodmay, May 24 “…Dr. Nash and his wife, Alicia, 82, were in a taxi on the New Jersey Turnpike in Monroe Township around 4:30 p.m. when the driver lost control while veering from the left lane to the right and hit a guardrail and another car, Sgt. Gregory Williams of the New Jersey State Police said.

                      The couple were ejected from the cab and
                      pronounced dead at the scene. The State Police
                      said it appeared that they had not been
                      wearing seatbelts.... [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/25/science/john-nash-a-beautiful-mind-subject-and-nobel-winner-dies-at-86.html)

                      See also:  [John, Alicia Nash Remembered After Fatal Crash](http://www.towntopics.com/wordpress/2015/05/27/john-alicia-nash-remembered-after-fatal-crash/)

A Beautiful Mind Mathematician John Nash and His Wife Killed in N.J. Car Crash ;

Hmmm… So tragic!!!

                        What a crying shame!!! So
                          preventable!!! We will miss them
                          :-(

Unfortunately,

                          the NYT and others tried but missed the
                          fundamental point by following up with ["Deaths of Math Genius John F. Nash Jr. and Wife Show Need to Use Seatbelts in Back, Experts Say](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/nyregion/deaths-of-math-genius-john-f-nash-jr-and-his-wife-show-need-to-use-seatbelts-in-back-experts-say.html) ".  Why do we so
                          easily put up with crashes in the first
                          place?  It is as if it is OK to go around
                          crashing, just put on a seat belt.
                          Technology is available to avoid crashes,
                          but there isn't sufficient public policy
                          focus on avoiding crashes to accelerate
                          its adoption and enhancement.

The fundamental problem

                          was that the taxi was not equipped
                          with available automated stability
                          control, lane keeping and collision
                          avoidance systems.  This was not an
                          accident, it was a failed public safety
                          policy that refuses to move beyond crash
                          mitigation and its challenged "V2x"
                          initiatives to embrace forthright
                          automated crash avoidance.

Moreover,

                              there is a failed Taxi regulatory
                              structure that doesn't even hint that
                              taxis should have electronic stability
                              control, automated lane keeping and
                              collision avoidance.  What is the
                              purpose of taxi regulation, to keep
                              "Ubers" out of business?

It is time for the nation’s transportation policy to focus intelligence/automation on the vehicle in support of the driver. Hopefully

                          Congress will restructure the pending
                          transportation legislation to focus
                          automated vehicle technologies that
                          actively assist drivers when they make
                          driving mistakes.  We are not perfect.  We
                          deserve a public safety policy that is
                          more mindful of our imperfections. Policy
                          that isn't aimed at just warning and
                          scolding us but actively takes over and
                          does the right thing.  We, not

                              the infrastructure, are the
                          cause of most of the the highway carnage.
                          It is the driver who needs help and our
                          public policy should focus on delivering
                          that help.      Alain

###

The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car

Chris Urmson May 11, 2015 “After 1.7 million miles we’ve learned a lot — not just about our system but how humans drive, too. The most common accidents our cars are likely to experience in typical day to day street driving — light damage, no injuries — aren’t well understood because they’re not reported to police. Yet according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data, these incidents account for 55% of all crashes. It’s hard to know what’s really going on out on the streets unless you’re doing miles and miles of driving every day. And that’s exactly what we’ve been doing with our fleet of 20+ self-driving vehicles and team of safety drivers, who’ve driven 1.7 million miles (manually and autonomously combined). The cars have self-driven nearly a million of those miles, and we’re now averaging around 10,000 self-driven miles a week (a bit less than a typical American driver logs in a year), mostly on city streets. In the spirit of helping all of us be safer drivers, we wanted to share a few patterns we’ve seen. A lot of this won’t be a surprise, especially if you already know that driver error causes 94% of crashes.

                        If you spend enough time on the road,
                        accidents will happen whether you're in a
                        car or a self-driving car. Over the 6 years
                        since we started the project, we've been
                        involved in 11 minor accidents (light
                        damage, no injuries) during those 1.7
                        million miles of autonomous and manual
                        driving with our safety drivers behind the
                        wheel, and not once was the self-driving car
                        the cause of the accident. ... We'll
                        continue to drive thousands of miles so we
                        can all better understand the all too common
                        incidents that cause many of us to dislike
                        day to day driving — and we'll continue to
                        work hard on developing a self-driving car
                        that can shoulder this burden for us." [Read more](https://medium.com/backchannel/the-view-from-the-front-seat-of-the-google-self-driving-car-46fc9f3e6088)

Hmmm…. MUST reading; HOWEVER, we need much more information to be released, not just a few examples.  Please make your data public!  We don’t need to know who but we desperately need to know what so that not only Google, but the rest of us can… “…work hard on developing…” SmartDrivingCars “….that

                            can shoulder this burden for us." Alain

  Mailto:alaink@princeton.edu  This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.

Unsubscribe | Re-subscribe


This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.