When a self -driving car drove into reality，Unavoidable traffic accidents not only challenge the autonomous driving technology itself，It also puts forward new topics to the legal system; at the same time，Many foreign technology companies are also questioned by the public for suspected misleading marketing and concealing the truth of the accident。Research on autonomous driving is a typical cross -disciplinary problem，It involves crossing artificial intelligence、Auto technology、Economy、Law、Ethics and many fields，Relying on pure and pure single discipline thinking and methods，It is difficult to achieve valuable research results。From the existing research，Algorithm around autonomous driving、Attribution、Research on a series of problems such as supervision，Still need to open the idea，In -depth discussion at the forefront of technology and legal development。Recent，Challenges and key points around autonomous driving supervision，The reporter interviewed the Professor of Law Smith at the University of Southern Carolina, a professor of law at the University of South Carolina (Bryant Walker Smith)。

　　bet365 live casino games

"China Social Sciences": What are the latest legal development in the field of autonomous driving? What is the relationship between legal development and technological progress?

Smith:A major focus of the latest legal development is the development of technology。In the past few years，A few companies removed safety drivers from their autonomous vehicles，This move is better than wearing safety ropes than climbing。But this confident move introduced a new risk，Play challenges to the legal framework，Because autonomous driving has become a reality，No longer just assumptions。

From an international perspective，The United Nations has carried out work in many ways。First is to formulate international regulations on the design of the automation system，For regulations for countries to be included in their own countries，This move has the greatest impact on Europe，The United States and Japan also expressed interested in participating in the formulation of rules，thereby international impact。Autonomous vehicles will eventually drive out of the border，This also involves multinational data exchange and various control problems，For example，Vehicle company may be in a country，The remote agent of its monitoring system may be in other countries。International dialogue can help promote ideological exchanges and coordination，Relevant discussion on the issue of multinational issues。So，countries at the United Nations are discussing whether it is necessary to sign a new agreement on autonomous driving。European countries generally support this approach，and other countries are hesitant。

From the perspective of the US national level，The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the US Department of Transport spent many years to think about the supervision of autonomous driving。Although they move slower than expected，But some important tasks have been completed at present。First，To adjust the relevant standards，to adapt to the autonomous driving environment，Relevant bet365 Play online games departments began to re -examine the "Safety Standards for Federal Motor Vehicle"。Second，The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses a large number of law enforcement and investigation rights to monitor and handle safety problems in autonomous driving，Including surveys of certain driving assistance systems，Requires all companies that are being developed and deployed to develop an autonomous driving system or a specific driving auxiliary system to report data for analysis and research。

U.S. Congress has not taken any action for the time being，At present，The U.S. Congress does not promote or standardize the urgent need of autonomous driving -because these two tasks are within the jurisdiction of the US Department of Transport。But the US Congress does not take any reasons behind any action may involve many details，Perhaps it is the car industry to wait for better results，Perhaps other interest groups have different priority。For example，A major problem that obstructs the passage of the law is，The lawyer who appears in court wants to ensure that the autonomous driving company cannot force customers to resolve claims through arbitration，That is, the victim can still resort to the court。

The United States has implemented a self -certification system at the federal level，That is, the federal government stipulates a series of vehicle standards，and auto manufacturers need to confirm that its vehicle meets this standard。State first -level governments also have certain legal authority in the safety of new cars，But mainly focused on operational safety -whether the vehicle is registered、Whether it is properly maintained、Whether the driver holds a valid driving license，Each state has adopted different law enforcement methods in autonomous driving。I always advocate，Autonomous driving may be legal。Many states also hold this view，For example, before any relevant laws have been introduced in Arizona，Autonomous driving has long been realized locally。California has built a complex autonomous driving supervision system，and Gosas and Florida adopt a non -intervention attitude。The interesting thing is，In many aspects，There is a complex relationship between the operation taken by a state and whether the state has occurred in the state。For example，When California implements autonomous driving regulations，People think that car companies will avoid testing autonomous vehicles in California。Actually，In order to show investors, they have obtained government approval，Many companies choose to test in California。

　　Responsibility allocation should not be complicated

"China Social Sciences": Autonomous driving makes the accident responsibility distribution problem complicated。How to allocate manufacturers、Software developers and drivers responsibility?

Smith:The more automated the system，The easier the responsibility is。If humans are responsible for maintaining and driving their own vehicles，Then the law will determine that when the accident occurs，Human beings are responsible。When the system is completely automated，Human responsibility in the vehicle may be small，Like a taxi passenger，Companies developing and deploying the system need to bear responsibility。In the middle of these two situations，Many conceptual issues and legal challenges have emerged。For example，Humans may need to decide when to start the system，Although you don’t need to look at the road，But still need to pay attention to the prompt issued by the vehicle。The system prompts humans to take over immediately，Human needs to make a reaction，View vehicle failure，，Also alert to emergencies。This triggers a series of problems: What does humans need to do? Can humans do other things?，Who is the driver? Some countries suggest that humans are still responsible for ensuring that the vehicle is properly maintained、Passengers are a good seat belt、A response to the accident when the accident occurs。

I think this kind of discussion has complicated things。In the final analysis, there are only two situations: either people are driving，Either the automatic system is driving。The company realizes autonomous driving by combining artificial agents and machine agents，until humans actively return to driving。This method can put responsibilities on entities that are the most capable of ensuring driving safety。That is to say，If the vehicle requires humans to continue driving and humans do not take over，So the automatic system is still the driver。This will stimulate the company's necessary means，Including seat vibration、Improving the sound volume of the radio、Call emergency rescue personnel, etc.，If anyone has no seat belt，or insufficient tire pressure in the car，Autonomous driving mode cannot be started。The company should find a way to entrust the driving responsibility to the user，or start alternative，If you assign drones to transport traffic cone，Display the call center、Human operator、The spare system and even the remote driver。

If the future autonomous vehicle involves multiple companies (such as maintenance、Software Development、Hardware Company、assembly company、Platform company)，So we will return to the basic principles of responsibility，That is, the responsibility is not a binary。You can investigate the responsibility of multiple entities according to a variety of theories。For example，Laser radar designs that manufacturers who are not well designed may have to take responsibility。But I tend to determine the company with the main responsibility，Other companies can determine the issue of responsibility between them，But the victim can investigate the responsibility of all participants。

　"China Social Sciences": Will the regulatory agency consider the difference between autonomous driving and remote driving?

Smith:These terms are indeed often confused and used，Actually autonomous driving、Auxiliary driving、Connect to Driving、Remote driving is different。Autonomous driving is actually replacing humans through machines，Hardware and software perform dynamic driving tasks in real time。Comparison of comparison，Remote driving just moves humans to other places，For example, the rear of the vehicle，or even a thousand miles away。At the same time，There are overlapping between these systems，For example, a remote driving system will inevitably use some functions of autonomous driving。So，If the connection with humans is interrupted，The system needs to work independently to return to a relatively safe state。So，In many aspects，Remote driving will inevitably involve automation in a form of form。As for whether autonomous driving must involve remote driving，The answer is negative。This is very important for companies that are developing autonomous driving technology。Although you can also help remotely, although autonomous driving，and humans can also participate in the driving process，But real -time brake、It is not humans that accelerate and stepping.。For example，Vehicles may be displayed after encountering the construction area. I don’t know what to do，At this time, humans should tell the system，You should follow this road but bypass the traffic cone。Human beings can even plan a path，Then the autonomous vehicle will be based on this path，How to get using the sensor。In this case，Although the autonomous driving system needs humans，But it may not be used as a driver。Some companies further expressed on this basis，When dealing with an accident or responding to law enforcement，Humans are actually guiding vehicle motion in real time in a long -range driving manner。

In terms of supervision，The British regulatory agency has begun to determine the boundary between remote driving and autonomous driving to regulate。But I think，Even if these systems have many technical differences，But it does not need to be complicated in terms of regulation。Some companies drive vehicles through machine agents (such as autonomous driving systems) and human proxy (such as remote assistant or remote driver)。In terms of regulations，We should not distinguish whether vehicles are driving or driving in this road。We should think that the whole process is driving the autonomous driving system，When the autonomous driving system cannot be driven safely and it is illegal，Main responsibility belongs to a car company。Look at it from another angle，In the case of human driving ordinary vehicles，When the vehicle fails,，We will find the cause of the failure，It is not necessarily the driver's problem behind it。In the future, there may also be an autonomous driving system in the case of driving but humans intentionally invading the system，At this time, human beings should bear the corresponding responsibility。Today’s law is very complicated，The future will still be very complicated，But we don’t have to further complicate the problem。

　Frankly is the prerequisite for user trust

"China Social Sciences": As autonomous driving technology becomes more mature，Will the public concept change significantly?

Smith:People are often nervous before experiencing autonomous vehicles，But once you sit up, you will quickly adapt，Because it is almost no different from ordinary cars。After that，Some safety accidents that may occur have caused users to decrease in confidence in autonomous vehicles。But when people have the reason to use it，Everyone will regain confidence in autonomous vehicles，This is also the variant of human psychology。The public is fickle，We are easily affected by marketing，It may be different from words and deeds。So，Investigating whether the public trusts autonomous driving is not significant。We should not ask the public if you trust a new technology，Instead, ask the technology company if it is worth trust。If it is not worth trust，So the cars produced by these companies should not be on the road。This way of interrogation transfers the focus from technology to company，From empirical issues (trust) to regulatory issues (credibility)。

It is important to discuss the issues of public trust with the credibility of the enterprise。It's not that the technology is eligible to gain trust because of the public trust，The two paintings of the two are dangerous，Due to the failure of the technical failure。bet365 best casino games Recent，A Cruise unmanned vehicle dragging pedestrian accidents in Cruise。A lot of attention points are concentrated on the failure of CRUISE's autonomous driving system，Few people mentioned that the first person who hit this pedestrian was actually a human driver at the previous escape scene。Indeed，Cruise's autonomous driving system is wrong，However, tragedy will inevitably occur in the process of technical development。The minimum expectation of technology is that the accident rate caused by them can be lower than the accident rate of human driving cars，Because driving itself is risk，Driving in the United States is particularly dangerous，Big Canada、British and Australia are more dangerous。About 100 people die every day in the United States to die in ordinary traffic accidents。Country、Society、Supervisor、The manufacturer failed to solve this problem。So，When talking about new technologies, you should not focus on new things。

Although technical failure is inevitable，But the car company still has the opportunity to make up for。But in this case，Cruise company chooses to conceal the truth of the accident，Misled by the public，Only videos of the vehicle stopped after the person car collided with the car collision to reporters，Video content that does not display the vehicle restarted and drag pedestrius about 10 meters。This is unforgivable，Because before gaining millions of kilometers of driving experience，The only way to publicly judge the safety of autonomous driving system is to evaluate whether technology companies are trustworthy。These technologies are extremely complicated and changing，Full of uncertainty，Not every driving can get the same result。Even the regulatory agency lacks relevant fully understanding system resources、Data and professional knowledge。So，credibility has become an alternative indicator to measure safety。

　　"China Social Sciences": How should a trustworthy technology company improve credibility?

Smith:I think it is worthy to trust，The company needs to do three things: share their security concepts with the public、Make a commitment and keep the commitment。First，Detailed explanation what the company is doing，Why do you believe what you do is relatively safe，Why can the public believe it。This is equivalent to formulating a public safety case，Support it with evidence。Second，Promise to the public that the company only sells products that have reasons for safety，Frankly illustrates the limitation and deficiencies of the product。When the product fails，The company should immediately correct the error。Last，Technology companies should not excessively improve public expectations，Monitor the product life cycle at the same time。This means that the company cannot hide the facts，Do not seek private reconciliation to cover up the fact that someone is injured in the car。Over the years，We witnessed the exaggeration of the entire autonomous driving industry，Artificially improve public expectations，As a result, some companies are difficult to ride tigers，Propaganda effects are counterproductive。For example，The company should confess to the public: "We can't cope with snow days now"，or "The risk of autonomous driving in certain driving scenarios is slightly higher than human driving ... This is a problem we are working hard"。One year later the company reports the degree of improvement。This approach is credible and beneficial to the company's，User trust will follow。

　　"China Social Sciences": What problems will false propaganda bring?

Smith:Once the autonomous driving industry decides to face the public，They will gather strong marketing forces in the automotive industry and the information technology industry to persuade the public to think that the existence of autonomous driving。For example，Uber and Raodofer's two big taxi software accounts for less than 1%of the total car.，But subverted the entire taxi industry，completely changed people's travel methods。The same，Although the current autonomous driving technology will not be popularized to everyone，and the person who needs it most for the time being, you can't enjoy this service，But this technology will still have a significant impact。

Not long ago，Tesla has named its driving assistance system as "Autopilot" and "Full Self-Drive"，They are not autonomous driving systems，Instead, human beings need to be more focused on supervising and driving the vehicle。The relevant autonomous driving accident that has occurred may be caused by poor system performance，For example, the static object on the roadside cannot be detected，or maybe even to some objects，It may be because the driver thinks that the system is smart enough, so it is relaxed。Tesla Xiangyu and Bear Palm，While using the gimmick of autonomous driving，Push the responsibility to the user。Not long ago，A driver accidentally caused an accident due to the Earzla Autonomous driving system and was criminally prosecuted，The result of the case is not good for the driver。There are also some accident victims in the lawsuit claiming Tesla's autonomous driving system caused an accident。There are two early court judgments to support Tesla，There are also some accidents reached a reconciliation before entering the court trial，Therefore, we will never know how the case results are。It can be seen that the jury is more concerned about humans，Not enough attention to environmental factors that may cause humans to relax or cause problems。Some state -level governments launched a survey on Tesla's system performance and misleading marketing，Study whether it should supervise it in accordance with state regulations。It is expected that we will eventually see more news of related lawsuits。

　Autonomous driving research involves multiple disciplines

"China Social Sciences": The ethical issues of decision -making algorithms are thought -provoking。How can we use legal means to solve the moral dilemma brought by autonomous vehicles?

Smith:More than 10 years ago，I use the problem of tram as an example to explain why perfect is not existing。Unfortunate is，Subsequent discussions continue to distort my initial discussion。The core of ethical issues is not who the car is killed。That is an interference item，The ethical issue that should be discussed is a question we have always faced: Should the company deceive and cover up the facts? Have you fully considered the various needs of users and the public?，But it is not for autonomous driving technology。Because when you choose between two inevitable damage，It means that a series of failures have appeared: the vehicle may have been driving at a fast speed，or the system may accept the risk that should not be accepted。

Design these systems need to consider probability，Whether to speed up、Whether to follow the traffic、Whether the driving style is aggressive。Then adjust according to the specific situation。How to deal with the conflict? Should Bet365 app download I slow down?，This is the actual method of the autonomous driving system after the vehicle is on the road。So，When we discuss the design of the autonomous driving system，Don't pay too much attention to the so -called difficulties，Should take a step back to examine，How to identify and manage the risks and openly face the challenge openly。

　　"China Social Sciences": in this field，What topics can jurists study?

Smith:I am very interested in law enforcement issues，For example, the relationship between car companies and public entities。Whether the car company actively share data with the police station，Auto companies find that someone will report the case in the car，Whether the car company will ensure that the data cannot retrieve and access through other external technology。

Scholars in the field of law can also study private execution problems。How will the car company use your own power，For example，If the pedestrian walks to the front of the autonomous vehicle，Should the company identify this person's identity? Do you recognize his identity through facial recognition technology or testing pedestrian mobile phones?，Will the company prohibit the person from using the company's other services as a punishment? This problem involves the potential power of private companies' growth。

Another，Considering that autonomous vehicles may change people's travel methods and urban structures，This involves land use、Road use and other questions。How to plan a limited space? Can cities be given priority to some users when managing the side space of the road?，So as to achieve a broader public policy goal? There are also some important legal and policy issues involving low -income and middle -income countries，For example, how to promote new technologies in these countries? What should we do now to reduce the impact on low -income countries?、Policy and progress related issues: We need to use new problems to replace old problems，But overall，New problems will be less than old problems。