Google’s Driverless Car Law Poses Threat to Californians’ Safety and Privacy

Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    Google’s Driverless Car Law Poses Threat to Californians’ Safety and Privacy

    SANTA MONICA, CA – The driverless car law signed today by Gov. Jerry Brown at a ceremony at Google’s headquarters in Mountain View poses threats to Californians’ safety and privacy, Consumer Watchdog said.

    SB 1298 directs the Department of Motor Vehicles to write regulations covering robot cars by January 2015, but the Legislature didn’t require Google to come back for final approval before the driverless cars go from testing stage to the car lot.  The law, written by Sen. Alex Padilla, provides no real privacy protections, the nonpartisan, nonprofit group said.

    “Substantial safety and liability questions remain,” said John M. Simpson, Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project director.  “On the privacy issue, the law gives the user no control over what data will be gathered and how the information will be used.”

    Consumer Watchdog said that there is little question that driverless car technology will become a reality.  The problem is the way the Legislature and Governor rushed to endorse the technology without considering its ramifications.

    “What this demonstrates more than anything else is Google’s ability to dazzle and get is way,” said Simpson.  “The governor and many legislators have been taken for a ride by Google – and I don’t just mean in the Internet giant’s driverless test vehicles.”

    The last time Sacramento moved so quickly on such an extraordinary technological policy shift was over electricity deregulation, which ended with unprecedented massive blackouts engineered by energy pirates like Enron, Consumer Watchdog said.

    The time to ensure that the new driverless car technology has the necessary safety and privacy protections is while it is being designed and developed, Consumer Watchdog said.  Trying to catch up after a new technology is developed and broadly implemented simply will not work.

    “Google has repeatedly demonstrated that it only pays lip service to privacy concerns and repeatedly violated consumers’ privacy,” said Simpson. “Consumers must have the right to give opt-in consent before any data gathered through driverless car technology is used for any purpose other than driving the vehicle.”

    – 30 –

    Visit our webstite at www.ConsumerWatchdog.org

    , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    This post was written by:

    John M. Simpson

    - who has written 414 posts on Inside Google.


    Contact the author

    Leave a Reply

    ルイヴィトンは旅行の芸術なので、ルイヴィトンは比較的人気の高いブランドで、現在は手動で機械的に混合してパッケージングを行っています。 ルイヴィトンiphoneケースの海外での価格は、国民に比較的近いです。 しかし、エルメスは異なっています。馬が馬を生産するのは初めてです。そのため、エルメスは主に手作りの芸術であり、一般的な意味では贅沢ではありません。 エルメスiphoneケースのすべての製品は、芸術作品として楽しんで保存することができます。 ルイ?ヴィトンは、価格面ではルイ?ヴィトンよりもはるかに高いですが、質の面ではそれほど優れているわけではありませんが、近年では生産の増加により衰退の兆しが見えてきました。 最も顕著なパフォーマンスは、ブランド携帯ケース伝統的に手作業で加工された部品の多くが現在機械加工されていることです。加工の質は向上しますが、機械と労働は必ずしも成績ではありません。