Over $100 billion has been invested in this as yet unproven technology, there is no historical analogue for that. This money has been invested either because th

Over $100 billion has been invested in this as yet unproven technology, there is no historical analogue for that. This money has been invested either because the players involved stand to make a lot of money, or else they stand to lose a lot of money if they don't invest in the technology. Moreso the latter than the former, really. Plenty of lipservice is paid to the potential safety benefits, along with a laundry list of other social benefits, but really it's about money. By logical extension, autonomous vehicles have to be safer than human drivers, or they just won't fly. Too many accidents invites regulatory scrutiny, time consuming safety audits, and worst of all, public backlash. If you look at the players across the industry they can be broken into two distinct categories: the offensive players, and the defensive players. The offensive players: Namely Waymo, but also Cruise, Aurora innovation, Drive.ai, Argo.ai, Zoox and Nutonomy: their safety records are impeccable. But there are two prominent defensive players who both would be better off if AVs were never a thing: Tesla and Uber. For them, screwing it up for everyone is a net benefit to their business models. Now, if we were actually concerned about safety, we wouldn't be driving, we'd be riding bicycles (or walking or taking the train/bus), and our cities would more closely resemble what they were in the 1930s or earlier. But there's no money in bikes, and everybody hates them.