> Aren't they better than human drivers already? I haven't drove the only system that calls itself autopilot, but some of the comparable systems from other man

> Aren't they better than human drivers already? I haven't drove the only system that calls itself autopilot, but some of the comparable systems from other manufacturers. In my opinions the cars are significantly worse drivers than the average human. Their perception field is tiny to what a human can recognize (especially with 1 camera / 1 radar systems), they partly react later than a human can do (e.g. you see a traffic jam 700m ahead or other cars wanting to change the lane far ahead) and their lane holding is not really smooth. They have one theoretical advantage at the moment: They don't get tired or distracted and make errors because of that. They might even have better reaction times in some situations. However in the same way that humans can fail in 1000 ways the software can do that too. You could argue that humans won't be prone to buffer overflows, segfaults, deadlocks or other kinds of bugs. Most automotive software is written in C - which is here most often not even trusted for non-safety related jobs. And although the software is probably better reviewed and tested than the average web or consumer app there's still a lot of room for errors due to various reasons. And developing some completely new system with an insane kind of complexity (automated driving) won't make that easier.