Self-Driving Cars Must Meet 15 Benchmarks in U.S. Guidance
The only regulation that really matters is making car manufacturers liable for accidents and they would have to pay a fine from $100,000 for the smallest accident (per car) up to $10 million per accident.<p>When the manufacturers &quot;can&#x27;t explain&quot; how the accident happened (after an audit was performed), they should be fined the maximum $10 million amount.<p>Why? Because for one assuming it&#x27;s just a glitch and &quot;they don&#x27;t know&quot; about it, then they should pay for incompetence. And two, if the car was hacked by a nation state, then their security sucks, and they should again pay the maximum amount so they have the maximum incentive to ensure digital security of self-driving cars.<p>Where third-party self-driving systems are involved (MobilEye, etc), the liability&#x2F;fine should be split 50-50 between the car maker and the system vendor.<p>Give car makers these &quot;incentives&quot; and the other regulations are more or less pointless (other than establishing common V2V and V2I standards and whatnot). Then you&#x27;ll see just how hard they scramble to make their systems safe.<p>EDIT: And here we go. Remote hack of Tesla Model S.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.kaspersky.com&#x2F;tesla-remote-hack&#x2F;13027&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.kaspersky.com&#x2F;tesla-remote-hack&#x2F;13027&#x2F;</a><p>We&#x27;re only at the very beginning of self-driving cars. What happens when there are 100 million self-driving cars  on the road? Will their security be as terrible as it is on our PCs?<p>People should get scared a lot faster about this stuff, before all car makers start writing their software and then refuse to write it from scratch again and just tack on to the poorly written systems new security features in the future as a response to such hacking.