>Preferring to die by human error instead of shitty software doesn't make logical sense to me and feels like your trying to justify something irrational. The p

>Preferring to die by human error instead of shitty software doesn't make logical sense to me and feels like your trying to justify something irrational. The poster, camjohnson26, did not say die, the poster said crash. Camjohnson26's point as I understood it was to compare two situations: 1. A crash that occurs because one of the drivers was extreme drunk, 2. A crash that occurs because of an autopilot in one of vehicles did not make the current action. In the first case most people and the legal system will likely conclude that the drunk driver was at fault. In the second case it will be more difficult to determine who was at fault. This second case may add legal, insurance and ethical complications that camjohnson26 wishes to avoid. For instance what if your insurance decides you are at fault for activating the autopilot under unsafe conditions?