Volume though. How many cars on the road each day logging hours with how many drivers in how many diverse conditions vs google cars?
And the fact is, it *has* to be close to perfect. It’s allowing a new species to drive that has no stake in human life or property outside its programming.
Trust is a hard won commodity.
—
I doubt there’s much objection to “separate but equal”. Special self driving highway lanes. Minimal interaction with everyday suburban / city traffic.
—
Workers voluntarily entering contracts can have “acceptable risk”.
Civilians with no connection to uber or Google cars whatsoever are in an entirely different category than brown lung among workers in a textile factory.
====
If self-driving cars kill people, they’ll eventually get banned.
===
i would ban cars in urban and suburban areas and have an up to date public transport system with bicycles and rickshaws. But nobody asked me.
===
Everybody’s in a god damned hurry to go nowhere. It’s annoying.
—
If the car only responds properly to legal moves, goodbye kids rolling balls across the street.
—
More likely the sensors shot THROUGH the bicycle spokes and she was moving at a speed unanticipated by the AI.
AI then is flawed and resulted in a woman dying.
—-
But victim blaming can kill driverless cars. Better to support it with humility than fight a dead woman.
====
I put driverless cars in the same category as 18-wheeler commercial trucks.
Their primary use will be for corporations to increase their profit.
“Only fatality” in a commercial situation will result, rightly, in a lawsuit and it’s not only fatality, it’s first fatality.
Work needs to continue because clearly they missed something.
===
I’m a HUGE fan of driverless cars, which is why a wanton disregard for human life in the name of progress will only serve to kill it.
====