Millions of drunk people drive on the roads. People can buy assault weapons, with no training and background checks. People who make self-driving software should be the least of our concerns.

There are laws against drunk driving (and harsh penalties for those that are caught), and you can't buy a firearm without a background check from a dealer (with more states requiring gun show dealers perform background checks now, too).

People building untested self driving cars is an entirely legitimate concern.

There aren't laws against driving while teenage:

"Nationally, 963,000 teen drivers were involved in police-reported motor vehicle crashes in 2013, which resulted in 383,000 injuries and 2,865 deaths"

I'd worry about that more than the odd geek with a laptop.

Legitimate: yes. Worthy of concern: absolutely not.

I don't think this would help at all because 1) most people are not interested in making their own self-driving car and 2) the small niche who is interested isn't going to worry about following the laws, as Hotz states in the piece.

From the article:

“I live by morals, I don’t live by laws,” Hotz declared in the story. “Laws are something made by assholes.”

Indeed, I would have a word with whoever made the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

This is just nitpicking. He is clearly talking about social laws, not fundamental laws of nature which are clearly different in scope and application.

So he'll feel morally okay if he kills or cripples someone by being reckless?

i wonder where he believes laws came from ...

From assholes. i.e. other people.

"Assholes", it would appear.

This was my first thought when I read the article. There ought to be some test track qualification before allowing a new system to be tested on the public road.

we already have enough laws. responsibility doesn't change because a computer does some thinking for you. Besides, how many people are actually writing their own self-driving software?