The Lexicon of Self-Driving Vehicles and the Fuliginous Obscurity of ‘Autonomous’ Vehicles

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW

Statute Law Review Pub Date : 2021-05-31 DOI:10.1093/slr/hmab016

James Marson, K. Ferris

{"title":"The Lexicon of Self-Driving Vehicles and the Fuliginous Obscurity of ‘Autonomous’ Vehicles","authors":"James Marson, K. Ferris","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Self-driving cars, also referred to as connected and autonomous vehicles, are not only in vogue among technology and car enthusiasts (among others) but they have been broadly considered to form a new and disruptive means of transport. The benefits of self-driving cars are replete with stories of inclusivity, safety, environmental benefits, and social connectivity. However, the reality of the words ‘self-driving’ and ‘autonomous’ in the designation of this form of transport are not only inadequately defined, they appear to be actively misleading individuals as to the capabilities of the vehicle and the responsibility that they as driver or person behind the wheel have when in use. Tesla is at the forefront of this debate given that it not only sells an option for its vehicles of full self-driving capability, but it also uses terms such as autopilot which, we argue, lead to misunderstandings by the public and may have resulted, directly or indirectly, to fatal car crashes. We conclude this paper with a recommendation that legislative change is enacted through use of an existing international Standard which will provide the definition and guidance that is necessary for the benefit of all stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statute Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Self-driving cars, also referred to as connected and autonomous vehicles, are not only in vogue among technology and car enthusiasts (among others) but they have been broadly considered to form a new and disruptive means of transport. The benefits of self-driving cars are replete with stories of inclusivity, safety, environmental benefits, and social connectivity. However, the reality of the words ‘self-driving’ and ‘autonomous’ in the designation of this form of transport are not only inadequately defined, they appear to be actively misleading individuals as to the capabilities of the vehicle and the responsibility that they as driver or person behind the wheel have when in use. Tesla is at the forefront of this debate given that it not only sells an option for its vehicles of full self-driving capability, but it also uses terms such as autopilot which, we argue, lead to misunderstandings by the public and may have resulted, directly or indirectly, to fatal car crashes. We conclude this paper with a recommendation that legislative change is enacted through use of an existing international Standard which will provide the definition and guidance that is necessary for the benefit of all stakeholders.

查看原文本刊更多论文

自动驾驶汽车的词汇和“自动”汽车的模糊

自动驾驶汽车，也被称为联网和自动驾驶汽车，不仅在技术和汽车爱好者(以及其他人)中流行，而且被广泛认为是一种新的、颠覆性的交通工具。自动驾驶汽车的好处充满了包容性、安全性、环境效益和社会连接性的故事。然而，“自动驾驶”和“自主”这两个词在这种交通方式的名称中不仅没有充分的定义，而且它们似乎在积极地误导人们对车辆的能力和他们作为驾驶员或方向盘后面的人在使用时所承担的责任。特斯拉站在了这场争论的最前沿，因为它不仅为自己的汽车提供了完全自动驾驶功能的选择，而且还使用了自动驾驶仪等术语，我们认为，这些术语会导致公众的误解，并可能直接或间接地导致致命的车祸。在本文的最后，我们建议通过使用现有的国际标准来制定立法改革，该标准将为所有利益相关者的利益提供必要的定义和指导。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Statute Law Review LAW-

CiteScore

0.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The principal objectives of the Review are to provide a vehicle for the consideration of the legislative process, the use of legislation as an instrument of public policy and of the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The Review, which was first established in 1980, is the only journal of its kind within the Commonwealth. It is of particular value to lawyers in both private practice and in public service, and to academics, both lawyers and political scientists, who write and teach within the field of legislation.