Hacker News Reader

Comment by jsnathan | Hacker News Reader

(from the press release)

  > Members of the [President's Strategic and Policy Forum] will be charged with
  > providing their individual views to the President — informed by their unique
  > vantage points in the private sector — on how government policy impacts
  > economic growth, job creation and productivity. The Forum is designed to
  > provide direct input to the President from many of the best and brightest in
  > the business world in a frank, non-bureaucratic and non-partisan manner.

There are an initial 16 members on this council, all current or former business leaders.

I wonder if having both Musk and Kalanick on this council signals anything about Trump's position on driverless car regulation, or will otherwise influence it going forward.

View on HN

The person he's appointed to be Transport Secretary, Elaine Chao, is very hands off (no pun intended) when it comes to regulation, which is likely to be a good sign for driverless cars.

no pun intended? what's the pun?

She's "hands off" when it comes to regulation, which may advantage cars that can drive with "hands off" the wheel.

Ah, I must be a bit dense this morning. I was wondering if she had lost her hands in an accident or something.

I missed it at first too, and started thinking: "I guess she has no hands maybe...?" Then I realized I'm an idiot.

But this will conflict with job creation given that the first casualties of autonomous vehicles will be truckers (long distance drivers). So I am interested to see how this actually pans out.

Is it now? Because lack of regulation will not hurt adoption when youll get a completely retarded accident caused by lets say...half blind Tesla lane assist "autopilot" plowing into something at full speed because the obstructiom doesnt take full lane It will take one fucking viral video of something like that

So you say. Autopilot has already been responsible (in part) for at least one death, and hasn't seemed to slow adoption or interest at all. Look at driving itself: there are all sorts of horrible accidents that we see on the side of the road, but we still get behind the wheel every day. People are very willing to accept risk for convenience.

The real backlash will occur when an autonomous car kills a pedestrian or another driver and the wealthy owner of the autonomous car walks away without a scratch.

Even in that situation I would think that in the current climate the circumstance of the accident would also be taken into account by the public / the press. I.e. did it occur in a situation where a human driver might also have been unable to avoid it.

It would take a shift in perception, perhaps caused by mass layoffs resulting from the widespread adoption of self-driving trucks, before people would be disposed to hold self-driving cars to a higher standard than human drivers in order to feel safe. But it is not clear if such a shift in perception will occur. People still love Uber, even though the taxi drivers are upset.

I think that as things stand, most people would be OK with self-driving cars if they were convinced that AI drivers are at least as good as human drivers at avoiding accidents (wherever and whenever AI drivers are allowed to drive).

I'm sure a horse-and-buggy owner said that about automobiles too.

Being hands off about protecting the public is not a good sign for any industry. It allows bad actors to flourish.

His secretary of transportation is pro-gig economy and pro uber/lyft.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com