Feds Demand Autonomous Vehicle Companies Stop Interfering With First Responders
- Reference: 0184396478
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/07/10/1947248/feds-demand-autonomous-vehicle-companies-stop-interfering-with-first-responders
- Source link:
> [NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison] noted in [2]the letter (PDF) that the agency has "identified a clear pattern of driverless AVs interfering with law enforcement and other first responders," citing instances in which these vehicles drove into active emergency scenes, blocked the paths of ambulances and firefighters, or failed to recognize and respond to basic safety conditions like flashing lights, flares, smoke, fire, and traffic cones. The agency has demanded that AV developers present their "solutions" to this problem by the end of the month.
>
> "Let me be clear: the inability to detect and appropriately respond to such situations represents a functional insufficiency," Morrison's letter reads. "Emergency scenes are not rare or extreme 'edge cases.' As such, NHTSA is today issuing a call to action for AV developers and operators to immediately focus their resources on fixing this issue." The agency doesn't explicitly call out any particular company in the letter; however, the details suggest it is directed at robotaxi operators like Waymo.
>
> [...] The agency's letter to AV developers doesn't say what the consequences would be if the request is ignored. Nor does it outline what the acceptable solutions would be. But the agency does imply it would hold companies accountable, just as it does human drivers who impede law enforcement. "Every second matters when law enforcement officers, firefighters, or paramedics are answering a call because lives are on the line," the letter states. "That is why human drivers who impede these operations are subject to fines and even jail time."
>
> The agency also noted in a press release accompanying the letter that it's making progress on updating Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) requirements, which govern vehicle design and equipment requirements. These proposed changes could help autonomous vehicle companies like Tesla and Zoox, which are developing vehicles without steering wheels, pedals, or other features required on human-driven cars. The agency has already proposed rules that would eliminate the need for windshield wipers, sun visors, defogging systems, and tire placards. The agency released a new 2026 Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda last week, outlining its proposals.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/08/feds-demand-autonomous-vehicle-companies-stop-interfering-with-first-responders/
[2] https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2026-07/ADS-developers-letter-july-2026.pdf
danger danger (Score:2)
People were asking "how will these cars do things like humans such as pull over for emergency vehicles" a long time ago. Other people responded, they can see all around them and are driven by a computer so it's not a problem. And here we are...
Ask the passenger (Score:1)
Why is their AI having trouble identifying emergency barriers, uniformed people making hand-signals, big puddles, and emergency vehicles? It doesn't seem like the kind of thing AI typically fails at.
Maybe the bot-car should ask the passengers for help if not sure. I suspect it often over-identifies such that engineers turned down the reaction threshold. Instead, try asking the damned humans. "Possible emergency situation ahead. I plan to stop and wait. Please confirm if this is a the proper action. Press
Re: Ask the passenger (Score:2)
When you say "it's not something AI usually fails at" what are you comparing to? Is there some AI that always follows flag wavers in real time?
Who is liable in an accident? (Score:2)
No steering wheel, no brakes, no pedals, no decontrol over the vehicle of any kind
So who is liable in an accident? The manufacturer?
Re: Who is liable in an accident? (Score:3)
The company is the operator.
We can hold corporations responsible, we just usually don't
Easy part's done (Score:3)
They made them capable of easy-mode driving.
Now the engineers need to work on exception handling.
I mean that sincerely. These things only work when things are normal. [1]Power failures [apnews.com], unmapped blockages, a roman candle in the street, [2]even crowds [gazetteer.co] turn them in to traffic blockages themselves.
Just wait until there's an actual mass casualty event - earthquake, terror, something like that, and these all things go comatose in intersections like they did in SF last year.
[1] https://apnews.com/article/waymo-cars-san-francisco-power-outage-traffic-81e6a00aa2be6b804fe0bdfbcf07401f
[2] https://sf.gazetteer.co/take-me-waymo-im-home-autonomous-taxis-had-a-buggy-july-4th
At least.. (Score:2)
They will fix this problem, as it's just a situation that needs to be addressed. I wonder why they don't send out letters to humans, because they do exactly the same things.
Priorities (Score:4, Interesting)
Years back I was interviewing people for a coding position. We went through the standard tech stuff and then did a bit of project to see how they thought. We said (this is circa 2009'ish I think) - imagine you're on a team creating a new phone. You don't have time to test all the functions, so which would be your top two functions to ensure working?
All a bit Kobayashi Maru - obviously you can't release a phone testing only two functions, but we wanted to see what they'd prioritise. The very best answer we received was this one: "I would make sure it has the ability to call emergency services." Their thinking was that this was likely the most critical feature of a phone for both a user, and also for the manufacturer to avoid being sued. Absolutely great answer.
And yet here we are, with the post above. Taking the thinking of this interviewee - the ability to work with emergency services is important for general society, for the user of the vehicle (so they don't get in trouble) and for the manufacture of the vehicle (so they don't get fined/sued/both). Absolutely critical.
Good luck with that (Score:2)
So the problem with these things is they Don't really work. Google admitted that at a congressional hearing. They're basically remote controlled cars with really really fancy driver assist features. Frighteningly it appears that they are sometimes piloted from the Philippines. Publicly Google will tell you that's not true but that's not what they told Congress when they were under oath...
The obvious problem with all this is that they're going to have problems with ambulances and such. And that's the way
Re: (Score:2)
> So the problem with these things is they Don't really work. Google admitted that at a congressional hearing.
I'm going to go ahead and ask what - specifically - Google "admitted" in said hearing. I doubt it's "don't really work" but leave open the possibility that's what was admitted, so please provide quotes.
> They're basically remote controlled cars with really really fancy driver assist features.
Really? It's my understanding that they're autonomous the vast majority of the time, remote-controlled in very rare circumstances, and driver-assist never. Passengers in these cars aren't permitted to manually drive them, so driver-assist isn't a thing. I grant that I may be misinformed, but again, I invi