China to tighten road traffic laws as use of smart-driving systems expands
BEIJING (REUTERS)China will tighten road traffic regulations and set out legal responsibilities to ensure public safety, its public security ministry said on Wednesday, as the use of assisted driving technology in vehicles increases.Beijing is stepping up scrutiny of the technology after a fatal accident in March involving a Xiaomi SU7 sedan which had been in assisted-driving mode seconds before a crash.More tests and verification will be required by car makers, who will have to make clear the limits of such systems and security responses, public security ministry official, Wang Qiang, told a press conference.Smart-driving systems on cars for sale do not have autonomous driving functionality, yet they are included in the assisted-driving category, Wang said.Drivers face safety and legal risks if they are involved in accidents while their hands or eyes are otherwise occupied while the assisted driving feature is turned on, he added.China will bar automakers from "exaggeration and false promotion" of assisted-driving features, Wang said, echoing remarks by the industry ministry.
The public security ministry is also considering changes to driving tests to include standards on autonomous driving and standard assisted driving.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Zawya
4 hours ago
- Zawya
Brexit's parallels with Trump tariffs tell a tale: Mike Dolan
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters) LONDON - In figuring out why the U.S. tariff shock hasn't sent the economy or financial world into a tailspin, Britain's exit from the European Union trade bloc provides something of a playbook - and without a particularly happy ending. Aside from vast differences in economic scale and global reach, the two episodes bear some comparison in how they upended years of deeply integrated free trade and possibly in how business, the economy at large and financial markets reacted. The 2016 Brexit referendum and Trump's tariffs this year were each widely billed as economic shocks that would send the financial world into paroxysms. They didn't, at least not at the outset. To be sure, both were followed by dramatic downward lurches in the two countries' respective currencies. But, to some extent, the steep drop in sterling after the referendum vote and the dollar's plunge on President Donald Trump's tariff plan this year helped offset some of the wider impact - at least on stock markets that are loaded with global firms with outsized foreign revenue. More broadly, however, the difficulty in isolating their immediate net impact means no "big bang" economic crisis unfolds to prove critics right - even if their enduring legacy turns out to be a slow burn of economic potential and lost output, often obscured by multiple other crosswinds. SLOW BURN In Britain's case, the seismic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic distorted any attempt to easily assess Brexit when it actually happened. Tortuous negotiations with the EU meant the UK's departure eventually occurred on the eve of the health crisis in 2020 and the new trade rules did not come into force until a year later. But in the four years between the referendum surprise and the pandemic, the UK economy never entered a recession nor recorded a negative quarterly GDP print - confounding pro-EU supporters at the time and bolstering the Brexit lobby. Emerging from the twin hits, however, the economy has almost flatlined since. FTSE 100 stocks, helped by the weaker pound, kept pace with the S&P 500 and world indexes for about a year after the referendum before chronic underperformance set in. Since 2018, the UK market has lagged MSCI's all-country index by some 35%. What's more, it's taken more than eight years for the pound's effective exchange rate to recover its pre-referendum levels. Few mainstream economists now doubt that Brexit has taken a serious toll on the UK economy - even if blame for that gets sprayed in multiple directions - and oceans of ink have been spilled trying to disentangle the precise impacts. One academic study by a number of Bank of England economists earlier this year concluded that uncertainty following the referendum resulted in little change in goods exports and imports before the exit was finalized. But after the new rules hit, UK imports fell 3% and overall exports fell 6.4%, largely because of the 13% hit in exports to the EU. While this slump seems relatively modest compared to the official forecasts of the longer-term hit, the pain has been borne disproportionately by small businesses. Additionally, these findings exclude the Brexit hit to services and London's finance sector, which registered a much bigger economic dent. And the cumulative damage to London and the service sector over the next 10 years continues to worry the City. 'LIGHTING A FIRE' The U.S. tariff story is of a completely different order, of course, as it will reverberate across the world economy. But there are some parallels, not least in certain aspects of the market reactions and the initial resilience. Economists estimate that the tariffs could lop anywhere from 0.5% to 1.0% off U.S. GDP over time. That's a $150-$300 billion hit, which, though painful, would not be an instant crisis for an economy that's growing at a roughly 2% annualized rate, where imported goods represent just 11% of GDP and where tech and AI trends are generating considerable tailwinds. But as former White House economic adviser Jason Furman pointed out in a New York Times essay last week, the tariff damage is likely not a one-off hit. The loss of 0.5% of GDP, he argued, is "the equivalent of every household in America taking around $1,000 and lighting it on fire - then doing it again every year. Forever." In the end, the main point of the British comparison is to show how extreme partisan arguments on the pros or cons of such giant economic policy changes don't necessarily get resolved cleanly in adaptive, hardy and hyper-complex modern economies. The upshot is there's rarely a big crash to prove a point. And that in itself is unnerving if politically-motivated policies then appear workable on the surface and resist instant pushback - only to act as a drain on the economy over a protracted period. Many observers reasonably argue that sovereign democratic politics should always trump economic conventions and even directions. But do people eventually notice when it goes wrong? The latest YouGov opinion poll shows 56% of Britons now think it was wrong to leave the EU - some nine years after their narrow vote to leave. The jury on Trump's tariffs is still out. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters -- Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn. Plus, sign up for my weekday newsletter, Morning Bid U.S. (by Mike Dolan; editing by Paul Simao)
Zawya
5 hours ago
- Zawya
India's biggest refiner buys US, Middle East crude as Trump slams Russia purchases
SINGAPORE/NEW DELHI: Indian Oil Corp has bought 7 million barrels of crude from the United States, Canada and the Middle East, four trade sources said on Monday, as U.S. President Donald Trump ramped up his criticism of the country over its purchases of Russian oil. India is the biggest buyer of seaborne crude from Russia, which is under Western-led sanctions over its war in Ukraine. Its main refiners paused buying Russian oil last week as discounts to other suppliers narrowed after Trump threatened hefty tariffs on imports from countries that make any such purchases, Reuters reported last week. Indian government officials denied any policy change. On Monday, Trump said on Truth Social he would substantially raise the import levy on Indian goods, accusing the country of not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil but "they are then, for much of the Oil purchased, selling it on the Open Market for big profits". India imported about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil from January to June this year, up 1% from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by trade sources. IOC, India's largest refiner, bought crude via a tender from the United States, Canada and the Middle East for September arrival, the trade sources said on Monday. They declined to be named because they were not authorised to speak to the media. The refiner bought 4.5 million barrels of U.S. crude, 500,000 barrels of Western Canadian Select (WCS) and two million barrels of Das oil produced in Abu Dhabi, the sources said. The higher-than-normal purchases are partly to replace Russian barrels, two of the sources said. Indian state refiners - IOC, Hindustan Petroleum Corp , Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - had not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, Reuters reported last week. Indian companies do not comment on oil purchases. In IOC's tender that closed on Friday, P66 and Equinor will each ship 1 million barrels of U.S. West Texas Intermediate Midland crude while Mercuria will ship 2 million barrels of the same grade, the sources said. Vitol will deliver 1 million barrels of WTI Midland and WCS, they added. Trafigura will deliver 2 million barrels of Das. Prices for the deals were not immediately available. U.S. criticism of India's oil purchases from Russia sharpened after New Delhi and Washington failed to reach an agreement on a trade deal, prompting the Trump administration to levy a 25% import tariff on Indian goods. (Reporting by Florence Tan, Siyi Liu in Singapore and Nidhi Verma in New Delhi; Editing by Kate Mayberry and Emelia Sithole-Matarise)
Middle East Eye
13 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US states that boycott Israel will not receive natural disaster aid, Trump administration says
US states and cities that boycott Israeli companies will be denied federal aid for natural disaster preparedness, the Trump administration has announced, tying routine federal funding to its political stance. The Federal Emergency Management Agency stated in grant notices posted on Friday that states must follow its "terms and conditions". Those conditions require they certify they will not sever 'commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies' to qualify for funding. The requirement applies to at least $1.9bn that states rely on to cover search-and-rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries and backup power systems, among other expenses, according to 11 agency grant notices reviewed by Reuters. The requirement is the Trump administration's latest effort to use federal funding to promote its views on Israel. - Reporting by Reuters
