Latest news with #driversafety
Forbes
6 days ago
- Automotive
- Forbes
Tesla Doesn't Need Permits For Their CA 'Robotaxi,' It May Come Today
You might see a Tesla robotaxi (with safety driver) next to a Waymo in the San Francisco Bay Area ... More this weekend, according to reports Tesla has been stating, since even before their semi-launch in Austin last month, that they would soon deploy their supervised robotaxi service in many other locations, including California. In this week's Q2 earning's call, Elon Musk predicted they would have robotaxis deployed to half the population of the United States. New reports suggest Tesla may deploy such a service as soon as this weekend in the San Francisco Bay Area. But how? The most common reaction to this plan has been that because many states, in particular California, require that companies get permits before deploying robotaxi services, that Tesla would need to get these permits. They take months to get, and Tesla has not yet applied for them. Tesla can't run an autonomous vehicle taxi service. They can probably run a driver-assist based one. These permits are to operate an actual Robotaxi service, namely one that drives without a human in the car responsible for the safety of the vehicle. Tesla stated it would launch such a service back in June, but was unable to make the deadline, so it put out a test service with a human 'safety driver' employee in the vehicle. In Austin, that person is in the right-hand seat, and Tesla calls them a 'Safety Monitor' when there, but calls them a Safety Driver if they switch into the left seat for any complex operations. 'Safety Driver' has been the term of art in the industry for many years, and is a bit of a misnomer as the person does not actually drive the car, but--whatever you call them--the are the responsible driver for legal purposes, overseeing driving and able to intervene for safety. In the passenger seat, like a driving instructor for a teen with a learner's permit, the safety driver can grab the wheel or trigger the brakes. People debate if the seat matters, but the operation of Tesla's 'FSD' system with a human safety driver behind the wheel is of course very common. Indeed, there are people driving for Uber and Lyft in Teslas who turn on the FSD system while giving rides to customers. The FSD system controls most aspects of the car, and the driver supervises and takes legal driving responsibility. This has already been happening for some time, and apparently nothing stops Tesla from doing the same. A request for comment from the California DMV was sent to them a week ago, but they have been unable to respond, claiming more research is needed on the legality of this. What Permits You Need California regulations (whose drafting I had a minor involvement with) lay out 3 different permits for the operation of self-driving vehicles in the state for testing and taxi service. In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission has a series of permits required for offering taxi-style services to the public, both with human drivers and in self-driving vehicles. Tesla has one self-driving permit, the one required to test such vehicles with a safety driver. It also has the permit from the CPUC to operate a pre-arranged taxi-style service with human drivers. It has not, as of this week according to the CPUC or DMV, applied for any of the other permits. Tesla's self-driving test permit is unusual. Over 50 companies have this permit, and they are required to report every year to the DMV how many vehicles they are testing and how many miles they have been tested. Tesla always reports zero miles, and has for several years. They do this because they declare Tesla Autopilot and Tesla FSD as 'driver assist' systems which simply assist a responsible human driver with the driving task. A bit odd, considering the name 'Full Self Driving" and Tesla is facing lawsuits, including one from the DMV, over the confusion with that name. As long as Tesla can declare its vehicles to be operating only in a driver-assist mode, and not in an autonomous vehicle mode, they can argue the autonomous vehicle related permits do not apply to them. As such, nothing stops Tesla from operating a ride-hail service, like Uber, with human drivers and a driver assist system like FSD. The Blurry Line Uber ATG eventually came to a tragic end after a fatality with one of their vehicles The open question is, when does a system step over the line? In 2016, the DMV reacted very differently when Uber ATG, the now sold-off self-driving unit of Uber, wanted to test their vehicles with safety drivers. They told the DMV they did not need a permit, as they would only test with a safety driver, and thus it would be driver assist. With particular irony, the Uber ATG Chief who declared this was Anthony Levandowski, who had participated in the drafting of the regulations that required the permits. (Later he would be involved in a variety of controversial battles, be ordered jailed, and be pardoned by Donald Trump on his last day of office.) The DMV refused. They said that Uber's vehicles were clearly to be classed as autonomous vehicles being tested, and needed the permits. They told Uber that they would pull the licence plates of the vehicles if they tested them without permits. The DMV has not done this to Tesla. It has allowed Tesla to test Tesla FSD extensively on California roads while having the permit but declaring they are never using it. The DMV has declined to comment on why the two companies were treated differently. Tesla's FSD system is one thing, but their 'robotaxi' version is something more. It still needs a human supervisor for safety reasons, as it is not yet good enough, but it does all the tasks of a taxi service, including remote summoning, pick-up and drop-off and receiving requests from riders. It is indistinguishable from an autonomous vehicle, other than in not yet being safe enough and complete enough to go into commercial operation unsupervised. It is the very archetype of an autonomous vehicle in testing. Some would argue it goes even further when the supervising human is on the right hand side. Since driving school instructors supervise teens safely there, and probably a billion students have been trained in this manner, including myself, one can make the case that there's no big safety difference between the two seats. But going in the right seat does require a system that can do all those other little things a taxi needs to do. However, the reports suggest Tesla will put the responsible safety driver back behind the wheel in California, to avoid pushing things. Supervised vs. Unsupervised That Tesla can do this large deployment tells you what the huge difference between a supervised and unsupervised robotaxi is. You can put a self-driving system on the road with a supervising driver when it is pretty terrible, perhaps 1/1000th of the way to being ready for real deployment. This explains why Tesla could trivially expand their Austin service area, and shape it like a giant upside-down Tesla logo (or whatever shape it intended) while Waymo, which runs a real unsupervised robotaxi, had to take more care in doing an expansion in Austin around the same time. It explains why Tesla could deploy a supervised robotaxi over all of the Bay Area, indeed all of California or the USA, while the companies operating actual robotaxis are growing their services areas at a much slower pace. It has nothing to do with Tesla's approach to driving most streets potentially being more general than the mapped approach other companies use. Tesla can do supervised robotaxi everywhere (as could Waymo and all the other companies) but they can do unsupervised only at the Tesla Factory and on a movie set. At least for now. Tesla's service area in Austin was suddenly enlarged to look like a giant Tesla logo if you rotate ... More it properly. Or some other shape. They could do that because it's a supervised service. The main reason not to have a giant service area is the cost. The cost of the human supervisors. The cost of all the localization infrastructure. (It's a lot.) You're losing money so the reason to expand territory is because you think you can learn. You will learn, but in fact you'll learn more than you can handle with just a modest territory, so there is minimal virtue in big expansion of a supervised service, and that's why nobody has ever let one get very big. Indeed, Tesla said in their earnings call that it has only operated the Austin service a small amount, in the area of 7,000 to 10,000 miles, which is just 20-25 miles, or a handful of rides, per day per car. It's not clear what the goal of a large expansion is. Tesla's CPUC permit does not let them operate an Uber-like service where contractors drive their own cars. The supervising driver has to be a Tesla employee. As such, Tesla is, as employer, vicariously liable for all events. In fact, the permit Tesla applied for said they would only carry other Tesla employees but they may not be bound to that. (The CPUC did not respond to questions about this latter point.) Tesla's goal, like everybody else, is to make a vehicle safe enough to operate without supervision. Musk has said he wants it to be 'much safer than a human driver' which means going at least a million miles between significant crashes. Tesla's very far away from that at present, perhaps only Waymo and Baidu Apollo have reached it. Operating a supervised service helps in learning what problems are out there, but mostly it offers publicity. The California DMV and CPUC may change their views on just what is allowed under their permits. To run an actual unsupervised taxi service, Tesla will need a DMV permit for vehicles to operate with no responsible driver in the car, and a DMV permit for such vehicles to take passengers. It will also need a CPUC permit to offer rides in such vehicles, first without charging money, and later to charge for rides. It hasn't yet done any of that. The DMV might decide to treat Tesla like Uber ATG, and say, 'No, that's an autonomous vehicle, even with a safety driver, so you need all the permits.' Time will tell.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Automotive
- Yahoo
InventHelp Inventors Develop New Emergency Vehicle Alert Feature (LOS-323)
PITTSBURGH, July 25, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- "We wanted to create a vehicle system to warn drivers of an approaching emergency vehicle," said one of two inventors, from Burbank, Calif., "so we invented the SAFE SIREN. Our design prevents the emergency vehicle from being overlooked, and it could help prevent serious collisions." The invention provides an effective way to alert motorists to the presence of approaching emergency vehicles. In doing so, it allows more time for the driver to react and yield right-of-way. As a result, it increases safety, and it helps prevent confusion or sudden surprises. The invention features an automatic design that is easy to use so it is ideal for vehicle owners. Additionally, a prototype model and technical drawings are available upon request. The original design was submitted to the Los Angeles sales office of InventHelp. It is currently available for licensing or sale to manufacturers or marketers. For more information, write Dept. 24-LOS-323, InventHelp, 100 Beecham Drive, Suite 110, Pittsburgh, PA 15205-9801, or call (412) 288-1300 ext. 1368. Learn more about InventHelp's Invention Submission Services at View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE InventHelp
ABC News
23-07-2025
- Automotive
- ABC News
Research shows one in five drivers admit disabling car safety features
An analysis by insurance company AAMI of 480,000 claims over the past year shows 20 per cent of drivers admit they sometimes turn off features in the car that are designed to improve safety. Steve Cratchley, motor insights and operations manager at AAMI, said the most commonly disabled features were lane keeping assist, lane departure warnings, autonomous emergency braking, and autonomous cruise control. Of the 20 per cent who did disable the features, 69 per cent said it was because they found the safety features annoying, distracting, and too sensitive. Twenty-three per cent said they did not think they needed safety assistance features, and 13 per cent said they did not trust them. Lane departure warning and lane keeping assist were the most disliked features. Mr Cratchley said it was in drivers' best interests to keep the features enabled. "They're designed to avoid crashes, so we're really encouraging people who have this technology to learn what they mean, to understand how they work and to actually have them switched on rather than disabled," he told Nadia Mitsopoulos on ABC Radio Perth. Mr Cratchley said switching to a new car with safety features they had not used before was a big adjustment for many drivers. "People like my father, for example. He's been a truck driver, he's driven for 60-odd years, and when he got his last car he immediately called me and said: 'Look, Steve, how do I turn all this off? It's annoying me. It's trying to kill me,'" he said. "But the reality is, he was driving against this technology, against these safety features. "What he found is that, as he learnt what the bells and whistles and the lights and the mirrors and these sort of things were actually advising him, he became a safer driver, and that meant that those around him were also safer and potentially would have fewer accidents." AAMI's crash report also found that nose-to-tail accidents were the most common, something that emergency braking and forward collision warning systems were designed to help prevent. "As some of my peers have found when they've got their first new car in many years, it really is a case of working with the dealer when you pick up that new vehicle and understanding how these features work and then working with them rather than working against them or disabling them," Mr Cratchley said. Text messages from ABC Radio Perth listeners revealed a deep dislike of adaptive safety features in new vehicles. Paul: "I drove a hire car in Scotland with lane departure features, and it was extremely dangerous. I could put up with the annoying flashing warning signs (when there wasn't any danger) but the violent swerving back to where the car thinks I should be, has been close to taking me off the road into fields!" Julie: "I find the sensors absolutely annoying, especially in the country. It dips my lights when it thinks there's enough light — but I don't want them dipped! There's no-one coming. Everyone's eyes are not the same." Mel: "I have had my Kia Carnival slam on the brakes nearly causing me to be rear-ended because it picked up the car in front that was in the left-hand turning lane rather than in front." Glenda: "I have recently bought a hybrid and it's driving me nuts. I have not turned off the safety features just turned my mind off. The beeping is so constant that it's overwhelming." Eva: "I was in a new work car and it came to a sudden stop as I was merging lanes, luckily with no-one behind me. I was unable to get the car to move at all when this happened. I had to wait for what seemed like an eternity before I was able to move forward. Apparently what could've happened is that the car may have detected an old line and so brought me to a dead stop." Others pointed out that passing could be unnerving when the lane keeping feature was enabled. Kat: "We travel on regional roads and turn off the white line guidance. We've had occasions where there's been a dead animal or other debris on the road, even trying to give a cyclist wide berth, and if you try to steer around it the white line assist will push you back into the hazard." Marty: "It's more dangerous to have lane keep assist on. I've nearly driven into other cars and cyclists when the car has steered me into them because of our dodgy road markings." Paul: "Lane departure is a pain. Passing cyclists does my head in." Lane departure assist, which forces a car back between white lines, is disabled if a driver turns on their indicator. But for some motorists, the safety supports in modern cars were very welcome. Pam: "I can't believe people would sacrifice safety and convenience for the occasional beeps. I have a new car with all the safety features, and I love them, and feel a bit safer now that I can rely on the car to be more vigilant than even I am." Cam: "Emergency braking and alerts saved me hitting a cyclist when they went through a red light. It saved his life."
Yahoo
23-07-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Smith System Unveils New Brand Identity as it Advances Fleet and Driver Safety
New Look Reinforces Smith System's Leadership in Behavior-Based Driver Risk Management ARLINGTON, Texas, July 23, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Smith System, a global leader in driver risk management and training, announces a brand redesign that reflects the company's ongoing evolution and innovative solutions. The updated look and feel embody the integration of technology and analytics into the traditional Smith System, designed to provide enhanced benefits for fleet customers through substantial digital product expansion and modernization. A new logo and website serve as the initial visual representation of this evolution, focusing on the future while emphasizing the company's proven Smith5Keys® method, which organizations worldwide have relied on for over 70 years to enhance driver behavior. The 5Keys® method trains drivers to see more, think ahead, and maintain control. Building on this foundation, the company is developing connected solutions that transform real-world insights into safer driving on a larger scale. "Our new identity reflects the innovative, accessible, and data-driven company we are today," said Derek Dunaway, CEO of Smith System. "It honors our legacy of saving lives while signaling a bold future built on connected driver safety solutions." A Modern Look Anchored in Proven Results The new logo reflects how Smith System continues to advance safety by making it intuitive and straightforward. By combining world-class in-person instruction with scalable digital tools, the company enables organizations to address risks in real-time and cultivate safer drivers at any time and from anywhere. The newly launched website, provides a cleaner, mobile-optimized experience with intuitive navigation and clear, easy-to-understand explanations of the 5Keys® and the company's connected safety solutions, along with proven success stories. At the center of the rebrand is Smith System's enhanced Driver Risk Management platform, which fuses The Smith5Keys® behavior-based safety philosophy with modern analytics, mobile coaching, and corrective action recommendations. Smith's new platform is intended to bring risk management closer to every stakeholder in a fleet. Drivers can now experience technology-enabled training, a scorecard based on Smith's industry-leading 5Keys and the ability to receive mobile-based telematics and training. Corporate trainers can now use Smith's in-car technology to digitize their fleet's training, assess improvement of their drivers over time and apply automated corrective action and materials to drivers who need it. All of this can be tracked, monitored and assigned by fleet and safety managers in a way that lets them manage driver risk management for the first time. Smith System currently delivers solutions in more than 20 languages across 100+ countries, empowering fleets of all sizes to reduce risk, increase accountability, and instill a culture of safety. About Smith System Founded in 1952 and headquartered in Arlington, Texas, Smith System is the global leader in professional driver safety training and risk management for commercial fleets. Our 5Keys to Safe Driving method is the standard for behavior-based safety programs. We deliver a unique blend of in-person and online instruction, eLearning, and mobile-first tools that help organizations reduce collisions, lower operating costs, and foster a culture of continuous improvement. Our integrated approach to Driver Risk Management empowers fleets to act on real-time data, personalize training, and sustain safer driving behaviors. Trusted in over 100 countries, we have trained millions of drivers worldwide, helping all types of fleets gain a competitive advantage. Learn more at: Contact Information:Smith SystemRebecca Oistad847-431-3850roistad@ View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Smith System Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
CTV News
17-07-2025
- Automotive
- CTV News
MPI increasing capacity for Driver Z program
Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) is increasing the number of spots available for its popular high school education program. On Wednesday, the Crown corporation announced it increased capacity for the fall session of Driver Z to nearly 4,700 seats, including 2,126 outside of Winnipeg. This is an increase of 500 spots since the fall 2024 session when it offered 4,200 seats available. MPI noted that this puts it on track for 10,000 seats this year, which will bring it back to pre-pandemic registration levels. MPI added that registration for the Driver Z fall session will begin on July 23 at 8 a.m. The program, which is offered in communities around the province, uses a mix of e-lessons, virtual and in-person classes, and in-car sessions to help students learn to drive safely. MPI will post the Driver Z course finder on July 18 so customers can pre-plan which course works best for them. Parents are also encouraged to complete the first few steps of registration, including setting up the new driver as an MPI customer and purchasing the Driver Z program, before registration day. On the day of registration, parents and guardians can sign up their child for the program at an Autopac broker or MPI service centre, through the MPI Contact Centre at 204-985-7000 or by calling the MPI driver education phone line at 204-985-7199.
