There’s by no means a boring second on this business. The expertise is advancing (see examples right here and right here), authorities laws are being developed (see replace on U.S. laws right here), and new partnerships proceed to be shaped (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 most of the discussions; nonetheless, there was little agreed-upon. The subjects that usually are mentioned as needing requirements embody: security (typically), cybersecurity, information privateness, related automobiles (DSRC), signage, and even requirements on how the automobiles talk with different highway customers. These are all enormous subjects independently and the implications of those requirements, most of the time, could have implications for a lot of industries (not simply the driverless business).
Who ought to set up these requirements? Seemingly, it is sensible for the federal government to take the lead as a impartial third occasion representing the higher good. Alternatively, business 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 also be growing their very own normal for a way driverless automobiles talk with different highway customers, however they’re encouraging the business to undertake them (see hyperlink right here). There are additionally examples the place authorities works with business teams and requirements organizations (e.g., related automobile 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 positive we’ll proceed to see each number of strategies to growing requirements. My hope is that requirements should not developed too late within the expertise growth course of, the requirements might 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?
Notice: I’ll be on the Shopper Electronics Present (CES) – will you? Please e mail me (email@example.com) in case you’d like to fulfill up!