3 ms·

The issue is that we only have an informal definition of a "good driver" that relies on fuzzy things like intuition, empathy, demeanor etc when humans evaluate

The issue is that we only have an informal definition of a "good driver" that relies on fuzzy things like intuition, empathy, demeanor etc when humans evaluate each other for fitness (or judge each other in court), and self driving cars are forcing us to come up with an actual specification which we've never had to do before. One of the more impactful consequences comes from the way we tied the execution of civil liberties to the ability to drive oneself (at least in the US), and a fully defined specification for driving behavior will necessarily exclude many people that currently drive today and rely on driving for their agency. In fact we've kept the definition fuzzy intentionally in order to allow this. The existence of self driving cars is forcing our hand because you can't empathize with an algorithm.

AstralStorm 7y ago
Courts do not empathize and that's where self driving cars will be ultimately judged. The essential driving tests are fuzzy and weak not due to empathy. I've seen a lot of hate and rage directed at unskilled, mistaken or law breaking drivers. Or even just because. Road rage is a thing. The driving exams are weak because transportation is torn between safety and liberty or availability. Good enough self driving car would shift that balance. Additionally companies want cheap drivers and workers to reach them on their own, they do not care about accidents beyond certain base rate, even less so if a given driver breaks the law or annoys other users of the road. Including companies in the transportation business.