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.