The headline is clearly written to attract clicks, but in the article body, I felt this was more tongue-in-cheek than stirring up controversy. The author repeat

The headline is clearly written to attract clicks, but in the article body, I felt this was more tongue-in-cheek than stirring up controversy. The author repeatedly concludes that, though the driving style may be different, this "boringness" is actually a very positive feature. > It was slow. It was cautious. It was safe, a more attentive driver than any human could possibly ever be. > And later that evening, as I snaked my way back to San Francisco on the four-to-five lane wide Interstate 880, I wished it was the Google car driving me home. ... > That's a terrible complaint, isn't it? The impeccable standards are a sign the technology is really quite magnificent. ... > The way Google sees it is that even with those theoretical scenarios - where it's forced to choose between what it thinks is the least harmful - the Google car is still far smarter than a human, and, crucially, will save thousands of lives by existing in the first place. > Riding in a Google car may be slow and boring, but the effect it will have on the world certainly isn't.