I am tempted to agree about the steering wheel, but then I think of all of the situations where being able to take manual control would be really nice - like when towing a camper, or backing a boat down a ramp, or handing over to valet parking.

I think this is forcing a false dichotomy between having a steering wheel and driver liability for failures in the autonomous driving system. I think we can have a world with steering wheels and manufacturer responsibility... we just might not get there for a while.

You don't need to remove the steering wheel completely.

You just need to make it impossible for the driver to take control of the vehicle unless it's fully stopped and in a safe state.

Even with very good automation, it seems an incredibly high bar that you can automate literally everything. I guess you can maybe imagine voice control as a replacement but...

But to the parent comment, it seems insane to me that a consumer would accept full liability for some company's software as they would for their own driving. It seems obvious to me that the manufacturer is liable. If my taxi driver gets in an accident I'm certainly not at fault.

This is silly. I want a self-driving car that drives me 95% of the way to the mountains, but allows me to take control on the dirt road that is the last 1-3 miles to the trailhead.

That may be available in the end.

This change to the law makes it so that if someone else wants one that can't do that last 5%, it's not literally illegal to sell them that car.

I was responding to GP’s unreasonable demand:

> if the vehicle is autonomous, it should be illegal for it to have a steering wheel.

That's an overreaction, the simpler solution is to outlaw anything less than level 4 self-driving (or at least ban level 3 and only allow level 1 and 2 stuff until 4 is achieved), and make the liability on the auto manufacturer clear in the law.

But clearly people are appreciating levels 1-3, because they buy current cars offering them.

These levels still provide improvement in quality of life, but for a cheaper price (because it's easier to implement).

If it doesn't have a steering wheel then no one will buy it. It's too weird and different and will be a major obstacle to adoption. So yeah, corporate wants it to have a steering wheel for numerous reasons...including the one you cite.

Not noone.

If there was a low-end car that could drive my kids to/from school without a licensed driver present, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

So would any other parent who has the money, and regularly has a conflict between where work would like them to be, and where they need to be for their children's school. (Yes, I'm familiar with and have used rideshare. Uber's liability won't cover taking kids, HopSkipDrive will, but they cost a lot more and every so often you get the situation where they don't find a driver. The convenience of, "Don't have to worry about it" would be worth a lot to me, and would give the children a lot of freedom.

You are speculating. A self-driving taxi, bus or truck service might not find having controls important.

The owner is going to be liable, regardless of who is in control. Just like if someone else is driving your car and causes an accident, you (the owner) are the one who will pay.

"Just like if someone else is driving your car and causes an accident, you (the owner) are the one who will pay."

What? Do you go to jail If someone kills a pedestrian with your car? Do you have to pay compensation for injuries?

I don't know what jurisdiction you are in, but here the one who cuased damage is the one who pays.

You will not be criminally liable for what another driver does in your car (unless perhaps you agreed to let him drive knowing he was drunk or something like that) but you (as owner of the vehicle that caused the damage or injury) will be financially liable. You will be sued. Your insurance will pay.

> unless perhaps you agreed to let him drive knowing he was drunk or something like that

To provide some extra context, it's also possible to be criminally liable for what another driver does after leaving your car if they commit a crime that you had foreknowledge of. Here is one tragic example of a case where this happened:

https://truecrimedaily.com/2017/06/08/exclusive-ryan-holle-c...

I'd counter with a physical switch, which can not be toggled by the car, and which locks during a crash.

That way, the state of the switch lets you know who caused the crash.

According to your criterium that means never. There is no way to be 100% sure how an autonomous driving system will work as expected.

Yes.

How does the driver know reliability of closed-source, ai based autonomous system is the manufacturer himself doesn't?

They don't, so they shouldn't use it.

Take your statement and replace 'driver' with 'manufacturer' or 'retailer', and we can have a deal.