3 ms·
Indeed, the average driver is pretty bad, that's not the level to aim for with additional vehicular traffic. It is entirely possible we would be better off with
by a_imho 7y ago
Indeed, the average driver is pretty bad, that's not the level to aim for with additional vehicular traffic. It is entirely possible we would be better off with limiting the most dangerous elements' participation, but people actually need to go places while computers don't.
If safety is your concern, how do autonomous cars stack up against actually enforcing traffic laws, speed limits, safe following distances, distracted driving? We do not know.
IMO we need less cars not more. Better urban planning, remote working, improved public transport etc. are all different faces of the transportation problem, focusing on the current state of human drivers is just cherrypicking. We have autonomous underground trains today, we had them for years. Telecommuting will always be safer and quicker than autonomous cars (but less sexy and less profitable than AI hype).
- AstralStorm 7y agoMake that a self driving bicycle or self flying drone then. Similar related problems, in fact probably harder.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- a_imho 7y agoAre self driving bicycles really a thing? Anyway, it is apples to oranges, cars are way more dangerous.
- AstralStorm 7y agoNo, you won't get away with making a dangerous drone or bicycle, motorbike or scooter. Cars are obviously somewhat more dangerous due to mass and size but a small vehicle at a high speed... is almost as dangerous if not more so. Check motorbike statistics. See, cars are only a seductive topic because they're so common, and thus any risk reduction there should have high impact. Should any other mode of transportation be nearly as ubiquitous and fast, we'd be taking about them. For example, fast electric scooters are starting to get there.