Do you still need to sit for/obtain a Driver's Licence? No. You don't need one to ride in a taxi.

Can you go out and drink at bars/clubs/restaurants all night - get blind drunk and be well over the "limit" and then hop into your "driverless car"? Yes

What if a car (driven by a REAL PERSON...) runs into your "driverless car" - are insurance companies going to re-write  all motor vehicle policies - or just have "new" ones for "driverless cars"?   The insurance industry will adapt. It's much older than cars, and it adapted to them when they first arrived on the scene.

Are these cars also going to be able to "click"  in to another "mode" to be "driven normally"?? Why would you bother?

Technology like that in the video on the link below may help.

Toot2000 posted this on another thread …

Tesla Autopilot predicts crash seconds before it happens

https://electrek.co/2016/12/27/tesla-autopilot-radar-technology-predict-accident-dashcam/

Why would they get tickets?

...so they "know" where to park do "they"? These cars can "read" the street signs - can they? lol lol

 - oh and before you start calling me a "fool" Barak - this is just one of many many  questions in letters that people are writing into the papers as I type this .....!

Try "reading" them .........instead of being so freakin' quick to judge people's views ...........

Murdoch papers?

No, I don't read them very often at all.

Driverless cars can return to base. They don't have to park "nearby".

And actually, it would be very easy to create signs readable by such cars.

What was the last third world country you visited?

..........   when was the last one you visited ???   (If you ever managed to get outta' Melbourne?)      .........

Several in South America 18 months ago. Our roads are MUCH better.

(That really wasn't a very clever comment.)

...oooops.....musta' been made on one of my "off days" IQ wise........can't be clever alll the time ......        :-)

Sydney is congestion capital of Australasia - and even New York's road network is faster

Sydney has the unenviable title of Australasia's most congested city after a report from a peak transport body revealed it features seven of the 10 slowest roads on both sides of the Tasman.

And in a sign of the mounting pressures of a booming population, average speeds of 72.5 kilometres an hour on Sydney's road network – which includes motorways such as the M7 and M2 

.....ever noticed that many times - and on many "Topics" -  Barak - drops a "comment" and then - never ever returns to validate his case?

He also seems to be rather morbidly obsessed with "Murdoch"???   Weird?    lol lol lol 

.... Punt Road -  Toorak Road and Doncaster Road are the "pits" Abby!  Have been for years - years!!!  Trust me!   :-) 

I am not the topic. Discuss my posts, not me.

Abby, Those speeds are suitable for driverless cars because they will not travel faster than 40kph. I think it would be more important for Victorians to get their sewerage sorted so people can swim on the beach. 

I was discussing your posts (or lack or replies)  in my "first' paragraph!

Anyway - I won't bother you again - you are far too argumentative and accusatory regarding what ordinary people post on here!  I'm done!   Thank you. 

Huh?

I gave responses to four questions in your first post here. Nobody else bothered even replying. I seriously don't know what you're complaining about. Should be complaining about all those people who ignored your post completely.

To the negative people out there from someone who has worked in the data collecting area for these vehicles - these vehicles WILL be safer, they WILL be able to read the road signs, they WILL dramatically reduce the road toll BUT they won't be perfect. As we are now PEOPLE are far from perfect, of course crashes will still happen, people will still die but the numbers will be greatly reduced....maybe 90% reduction for the mass population.

Re the laws - laws can and will change.

Yep, the cars will probably break down, but a better comparison is a modern car. They are very reliable if you pay for quality.

Barak, you are correct.  Laws can & will change.  BUT, you stated quite authoritively, a pile of incorrect advice to Foxy, that involve Laws that have NOT changed.

You also come out with some more uninformed BS, 16 minutes ago.  $18,000 will buy you a Toyota Yaris that is MUCH more reliable than a $500,000 Rolls Royce.

Re the laws, I was doing something positive - looking forward.

Interesting re the requirement to have a driver's licence as well, e.g.

February 10, 2016
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- A blind man became the first person chosen to give Google's self-driving car a test ride after the federal government redefined what it means to be a driver on Wednesday.

For the first time since he became blind, Mahan sat in the driver's seat of a Google self-driving car and that's about all he did.

But California rules say autonomous cars still need a licensed driver and Mahan can't get a driver's license. "If it is required to have a licensed human driver in the car, it means I could not go any place in that vehicle without someone accompanying me," Mahan said.

But now, in a letter to Google, federal regulators made a key clarification where the law refers to a driver as not having to be human. Tech futurist Paul Saffo said it doesn't clear up other legal requirements like mirrors.

But if California follows the federal government's lead, it means people like Mahan could have more independence.

http://abc7news.com/technology/blind-man-chosen-as-first-person-to-test-googles-driverless-car/1195770/

Agree re updates will be needed, particularly for insurance and traffic infringements.

If you are not the licenced driver in control of the car you own and it is being 'driven' by a non-human licenced controller/driver programmed by a driverless car manufacturer ... who is 'at fault' you or the manufacturer?

Maybe Google and others need to set up their own insurance and traffic infringement funds to cope with such eventualities.