First, the great ambition at your fingertips
In addition to ruling the world, drones can probably rival all the ambitions of history. The trillion-dollar global auto market is only the first goal of driverlessness. The reverse control of a car-centric life and work is the long-term goal of driverless cars.
Imagine using a driverless car as a super terminal to connect all the travel, entertainment, ordering, accommodation, shopping and other consumption that occurs along the way and destination, and even judge the user to rent a house to buy a house, the location, real estate, market, Recommendations, reviews, and value analysis are available. As long as you say OK to the small secretary on the screen of the bridge, there is an e-commerce stack of smiley connection services. This huge commercial imagination is irresistible to any company.
The great thing about driverlessness is that it has changed far more than the automobile manufacturing industry and the taxi service industry. Instead, it has created a new economy centered on unmanned cars and an unprecedented life style and social concept. Academician Li Deyi of the Chinese Academy of Engineering hopes that smart cars will become the first business card of China's smart manufacturing in 2015, which is an academic insight into the industry. Under the infinite prospects, world-class IT and auto giants are almost in the unmanned market. Google and Baidu have been immersed in unmanned driving for many years. The rumors of Apple's car making can jump to the headlines at any time. Musk certainly won't miss the opportunity for Tesla to build a super driverless car, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, Audi, Volvo, Honda, BYD and other Chinese and foreign brands have also invested in it. Not long ago, well-known data expert Wu Gansha could not resist the temptation to leave Intel to join smart driving.
The future is so grand and seems to be within reach. Many people expect that the development of driverless technology is so difficult that there is no need to worry about becoming a reality in the near future. But almost 10 years ago, almost all Go players and technologists agreed that it took 50 years for artificial intelligence to defeat professional players. The Chinese Go team coach Yu Bin also said that it would take 100 years last year. However, Google launched an Alpha with 5 games. Victory swept the European championship. Look at how worried the industry is. Many analysts believe that driverless driving will be popularized within five years. Baidu announced mass production within five years. Audi said it will launch the driverless A8 model within three years, and Google estimates that it will not be able to wait for three years.
The US Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced last week that it recognizes that driverless cars do not require drivers in the traditional sense, and said that some mandatory car safety regulations will be adjusted accordingly. For example, cars must be equipped with steering wheels, foot brakes and Driver's license. This means that the US government is open to driverless driving, giving the unmanned car the same legal status as a manned car. US blogger Greenblatt's blog commentary even uses "eager" to describe NHTSA's attitude toward unmanned technology. It can be seen that US regulatory policy is intended to tilt toward driverless cars.
Second, driverless is a systemic problem
Technology can change the world, but technology does not guarantee that the world will get better. Unmanned driving is a breakthrough combination based on technological advances in many fields and has the potential to change the status quo of society. Driverless technology is a systemic rather than an isolated issue. The development of technology itself is not good or evil, and the simultaneous evolution of law can ensure that technological development is carried out in an orbit that is in the fundamental interests of mankind, and that technological progress becomes a positive energy. In the face of breakthroughs in technology, if the social system and cultural system composed of law, morality, and ideas are not kept up, the result will inevitably lead to disorder.
I agree with Academician Li Deyi that the essence of driverless cars/smart cars is wheeled robots. The essence of driverless cars is the robot that encloses the car's outer casing. The transport capacity is just the expertise of this smart machine. When we talk about the relationship between humans and robots, there are often worries such as robots exterminating humans or ruling the earth, so the fear of driverless cars cannot be said to be worrying.
(i) Security issues
According to Maslow's classification, safety is the most basic need of human beings. Unmanned safety solutions are mainly based on the development of technology, neither underestimating the complexity of security issues nor underestimating the ability of technology development. In June 2015, Google announced that it was driving a car for 1 million miles (about 1.61 million kilometers). None of the 17 minor accidents was caused by machine operation errors. In January 2016, Google announced 13 potential accidents in the new trials, and passed the manual intervention of the trial drivers.
In a sense, we can't ask the machine to be absolutely wrong, but just reduce the probability of failure to the theoretical limit. Human beings are far more unreliable than unmanned driving. I believe that relying on intelligent driving will at least not happen in 2015. A co-pilot of a German co-pilot maliciously ran into the Alps. Think about drunk driving, fatigue driving, emotional driving, unlicensed driving and reversing. You won’t dare to wear high-heeled shoes to kill the female killer... You immediately understand that Greenblatt says that autopilot can save 30,000 lives in the US alone. Not bragging.
In addition to being unaffected by motivation, lust, and emotion, artificial intelligence has at least two potentials that far exceed humans. First, unmanned driving can be agile, tireless, and with the help of radar, satellites and networks, not afraid of dark nights to see the road. Second, driverlessness also has strong self-learning and self-adaptation capabilities. Please note that when all drones share information, the evolution of any car is the co-evolution of driverless cars, which is an unstoppable advancement.
(2) Moral concepts
People are controlled by machines to violate human experience and intuition for thousands of years. This kind of experience is so deeply imprinted that it is part of morality, so that it is inevitable that people who feel like they are uncomfortable when they think of cars that run without roads. Of course, the concept is not impossible to change, at least when we feel that we are controlled by the machine, we should understand that we are only served by the machine.
It has been reported that ethicists have proposed an ethical and famous paradox "tram problem" to driverless cars, that is, how the driverless car chooses the following two emergency situations, and directly kills the first five pedestrians or emergency Turning and hitting a pedestrian on the side of the road. I personally think that this problem is not appropriate to a certain extent. Such legally attributed to the emergency hedging behavior should neither bear legal responsibility nor push it to ethical heights. As humans with higher primates, they may always quarrel for brainstorming such as saving the mother first or saving the wife first. Why do robots need to be able to solve it? However, it is practical to ask the driverless car to have a resolution. The front is a dog or a child's cognitive ability.
(3) Tort liability
The legal issues of driverless cars are quite complex, involving not only multiple legal relationships between design, manufacturing, users, and opposing parties, but the types of legal relationships themselves are complex. At a minimum, including contractual liability, tort liability, product liability and others.
Contractual responsibility
The contract is the contract. Automobile manufacturers have a commitment to quality and safety for drivers of unmanned vehicles, and the relationship formed is the contractual relationship. If the driverless car fails to achieve the manufacturer's commitment to the user, the legal consequence is liability for breach of contract.
2. Tort liability
The infringement liability is characterized by the fact that there is no need to prove any commitment with the manufacturer, and the user or the interested third party can request the driverless car manufacturer to bear the legal liability for the infringement damage in accordance with the Tort Liability Law. There are two steps in the analysis of tort liability. The first is the analysis of whether it constitutes a tort liability, that is, the composition of tort liability. Second is the commitment of tort liability.
There are four components of general tort liability, infringement, subjective fault, damage facts and causality. It is assumed that both the damage fact and the causal relationship are established. If the driverless vehicle directly causes a traffic accident and causes personal and property damage, then the two factors that need to be analyzed are behavior and fault.
An interesting fact is that a real driverless car should have no driver and no human driving behavior. The responsibility of a driverless car being manually manipulated is not the unmanned legal responsibility we are discussing but the legal responsibility of ordinary vehicle driving. Just as the traffic accident caused by driving murder is not a traffic accident, it is a deliberate intention. Killing people. The fact that no one corresponds to driving behavior is that the user does not have subjective faults. Subjective no fault + no driving behavior determines that the user's riding behavior does not constitute infringement and does not bear tort liability.
Then dismantle the manufacturing behavior of the driverless car, including at least three independent specific actions of design, manufacturing, and maintenance services, including the mechanical (including power system) and intelligent control systems of the product. Despite these independent actions, the liability of driverless car legal liability can be unified into one category, product quality responsibility.
3. Legal basis for product quality responsibility
Many Chinese laws have systematically stipulated legal liabilities arising from product quality.
a) As the most basic law in civil law, Article 122 of the Civil Law and Regulations stipulates: “If the product quality is unqualified and causes damage to others’ property or personal injury, the manufacturer or seller of the product shall bear civil liability according to law. Transporter, warehousing If the person is responsible for this, the product manufacturer and seller have the right to claim damages."
b) Article 41 of the Tort Liability Law: If the product is damaged by others, the producer shall bear the tort liability;
Article 43: If the product is damaged due to defects in the product, the infringee may request compensation from the producer of the product, or may request compensation from the seller of the product. Product defects are caused by the producer, and after the seller compensates, he has the right to recover from the producer.
Article 46 If a product is found to be defective after it is put into circulation, producers and sellers shall promptly take remedial measures such as warnings and recalls. If the remedial measures are not taken in time or the remedial measures fail to cause damage, they shall bear the tort liability.
Article 47 If the product is known to be defective in production and sales, causing death or serious damage to the health of the person, the infringee has the right to request corresponding punitive damages.
c) As a special law on product quality responsibility, Article 26 of the Product Quality Law states:
Producers should be responsible for the quality of the products they produce. Product quality should meet the following requirements:
(1) There is no irrational danger that endangers the safety of the person or property. If there are national standards or industry standards that guarantee human health and personal and property safety, it shall comply with the standard;
(2) Having the performance of the product, except for the description of the product's performance;
Article 41 stipulates that: producers shall be liable for compensation for damages caused by defects in products other than personal or defective products (hereinafter referred to as the property of others). If the producer can prove that one of the following circumstances, he will not be liable for compensation: (3) The existence of defects cannot be found at the scientific and technological level when the product is put into circulation.
d) Article 35 of the Consumer Protection Law stipulates: If a consumer loses his or her legitimate rights and interests when purchasing or using the goods, he may claim compensation from the seller. The seller has the right to recover from the producer or other seller after the seller compensates for the responsibility of the producer or other sellers who provide goods to the seller.
4. Legal interpretation
a) Product quality responsibility components
Product quality responsibility is strictly a special type of tort liability. The key words stipulated by the above laws for product quality responsibility are “unqualifiedâ€. If the product fails, the producer can be directly presumed to be at fault. The main criterion for judging disqualification is that the product has an “unreasonable dangerâ€. When Greenblatt commented on the product liability of the driverless car, he made two basic judgments, namely, judging "fault" and "unreasonable danger". The legal basis and legal provisions of product liability in China and the United States are similar.
It is worth noting that the judgment of “reasonable†is complicated as the main basis for judging whether a product is qualified. Whether it is reasonable or not is a factor that is more subjective than objectivity, and the judgment results of different people may be completely different. I think we should choose a driver who is a little higher than the average to judge whether the driverless car product has an unreasonable danger. That is, the reaction speed and processing strategy of the driverless car should not be lower than one that can not win Schumacher but still depends on The driver of the spectrum is like a taxi driver. In other words, if a reliable taxi driver cannot avoid an accident under certain circumstances, it is not appropriate to assume that the driverless car manufacturer is responsible for product infringement in the event of an accident.
b) Disclaimer of product liability
The legal liability of technical products also has a statutory exemption situation. This is “the existence of defects in the scientific and technological level when the products are put into circulationâ€. In theory, it cannot be ruled out that any technology has invisible defects, and defects will always be discovered in the future development of science and technology, but it is obviously self-restraint to adopt excessive vigilance and even hostility towards all new technologies. It should be noted that the scope of application of this exemption rule also has restrictions. That is, when a product is found to be defective after it is put into circulation, producers and sellers should promptly take remedial measures such as warnings and recalls, otherwise they should still bear tort liability.
c) Distribution of product quality responsibility
Driverless car manufacturing includes the manufacture of mechanical systems and the manufacture of intelligent control systems. The industrial processes include multiple aspects from design to sales and maintenance services. Even if the product quality responsibility is confirmed, it is necessary to further confirm the responsibility.
Although the manufacturing process itself involves multiple links, the responsibility is generally borne by the product brand, because the user buys and uses the product based on the brand. If the damage is indeed caused by a link that is completely unrelated to production, such as transportation, sales, and maintenance services, it shall be the responsibility of the party providing the relevant services independently.
d) Responsibility
Responsibility for personal and property damage caused by driverless cars is the most important type of responsibility. According to the Chinese law, the tort liability is generally based on the principle of filling in, and the infringement compensation amount is used to make up for the loss of the victim. However, if it is known that the product is defective, it still produces, sells and causes serious consequences. The court has the right to impose punitive damages in addition to the filling in accordance with Article 47 of the Tort Liability Law to discriminate against the producer's malice.
(iv) System security and privacy protection
Control system safety is theoretically part of the responsibility for product quality, and more should be prevented by technology in advance rather than by law. As hacker attacks become more widespread and more and more hackers get involved in criminal gangs and even political groups, the security of driverless cars is extremely challenging. Unlike the theft of a bank account as a property loss, the system security of a driverless car directly relates to the life and social security of the person, and the level of protection can only be exceeded.
Related to system security is privacy. The control of driverless cars requires huge data exchange. As a large mobile terminal, it is inevitably exchanged with the outside world. Driverless cars generate massive amounts of user data and have to be as open as possible to the Internet. This inherent contradiction will make the information security of driverless cars extremely fierce. Of course, from the opposite side, it is also a huge development opportunity for the security industry.
(v) Adaptation of the law
This is an interesting question, that is, the current traffic rules for traditional cars have to be completely revised in the era of unmanned driving. Article 19 of the Road Traffic Safety Law stipulates that “driving a motor vehicle shall obtain a motor vehicle driving license according to lawâ€, and the “Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Road Traffic Accidents†stipulate that the road traffic accident identification certificate shall be signed by the parties. Obviously all laws and regulations are in the default regulation of the object is the driver rather than the long and the same car as the car. Technological advances have forced legal evolution to become a long-lasting landscape.
Third, the conclusion
Driverless has incredible ambitions, but technology does not bring prosperity alone. When the technological civilization runs too fast, the social civilization represented by the law must also accelerate to catch up. Unmanned, we are waiting to see.
Battery Lithium Ion,Lithium Ion Battery 24V 100Ah,48V100Ah Lithium Ion Battery,Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery
Jiangsu Stark New Energy Co.,Ltd , https://www.stark-newenergy.com