3 ms·

It's never going to be 100℅ safe. But that's not necessarily needed. You just need to be safer than the human drivers currently filling our roadways.

• dboreham 10y ago
  There's no way this is true. What court is going to allow a self driving car to kill a human "because accidents happen"?
• agildehaus 10y ago
  It needs to be well safer than that. Humans have a higher level of tolerance for mistakes by humans than mistakes by robots made by humans. Every death and injury from self-driving cars is going to be on the news and public perception is everything to this technology. Fair? Probably not. But safety must be top priority here. We can't look like we're throwing this technology out there and hoping for the best. And I don't think you can say Tesla's Autopilot 2.0 has been shown to be safer than humans.
  • Nomentatus 10y ago
    Safer statistical in the mostly human driving environment is meant, and that already takes humans better understanding/prediction of other humans into acccount. If you keep safer (robot) drivers off the road, you're killing people to cover your ass.
    • agildehaus 10y ago
      Engineers won't have the say here. The public will. And the public does not care about statistics.
      • Nomentatus 10y ago
        If the public truly didn't care about statistics - even those they themselves observed - or their own convenience, then we'd still have flagpersons on foot preceding all automobiles. The history of the modern elevator is also very instructive in this regard: that device seemed infinitely dangerous to the public initially, but the statistics - almost no injuries - did decide the case in favor of elevators and their safety-springs rather quickly.