Just yesterday, we had the first vision of ?Apple autonomous car? in fact, a Lexus RX450h with special equipment from Ma circulating the streets of California, days after the news that Tim Cook and his gang were given permission to test this type of technology in the real world.
Well, apparently the people in Cupertino were not very satisfied with this whole exhibition. I say this because today Apple has already tried to send the State of California a proposal changing some laws disengagement reports (reports of autonomous car incidents, whose manufacturers are obliged to publish in any case out of the ordinary). All the proposed changes, obviously, aim at greater discretion and a lower number of leaks to the press of classified information.
In the letter sent to the DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles, equivalent to our Detran), which can be read in full on the agency's website, Apple says it is ?investing heavily in the study of machine learning and automation, and is excited about the potential of autonomous systems in many areas, including transportation ?.
However, a point that seems to concern Ma is in the way that the current rules of these tests require complete and public reports of all occurrences, including possible accidents or malfunctions.
Apple believes that public acceptance is essential for the advancement of autonomous vehicles. Transparent and intuitive access to the safety data of these vehicles being tested will be a central point in obtaining public acceptance. However, current reporting rules do not achieve these results.
The letter then proceeds with some suggestions that Apple believes are suitable as changes to the rules for reporting on autonomous car testing. Among them, Ma suggests that an ?incident? that compels the company to publish a report should be considered as such only in the case of an malfunction that compels the security driver to take control of the vehicle to avoid a collision or violation of laws. transit.
On the other hand, some factors that now force manufacturers to publish reports would no longer necessarily need to be reported, in Apple's view. Among them, operational obstacles that would force the security driver to take control of the vehicle, as a construction zone; system errors that do not affect the safe operation of the vehicle; driver decisions that make him take control of the vehicle for reasons unrelated to safety, like another car approaching quickly; or even tests whose purpose is precisely to take control of the driver.
There is no need to be a genius to deduce where Apple wants to go with this proposal: by reducing the number of cases in which the company would be forced to publish reports on its experiments, its tests would become much more secret, as Cupertino always preferred in all its areas of operation.
I imagine that Ma is suffering from adapting to this new segment, after all, nothing prevents her from testing her next iPhones or Macs within bunkers isolated from the outside world. Cars or autonomous driving systems, as you wish, however, are a completely different thing: they need to be tested on the streets, and these tests involve safety and human lives, that is, they need, at the very least, supervision. It will be interesting to see the next chapters of this worthy history Tom and Jerry with Apple trying to escape the spotlight and regulatory bodies by publishing the company's secret information every moment.