4 ms·

> Case in point would be self-driving cars, which are hilariously underregulated. Why is it bad? Self-driving cars kill less people than human-driver cars per

> Case in point would be self-driving cars, which are hilariously underregulated. Why is it bad? Self-driving cars kill less people than human-driver cars per mile. If we heavily regulate self-driving cars, we will slow down self-driving cars development. Cars will probably be safer, but the number of cars will be smaller, thus number of deaths will be higher. No, we don't need self-driving cars regularions at this moment.

tines 6y ago
> Why is it bad? I didn't say it was bad, I was just observing and predicting. > Self-driving cars kill less people than human-driver cars per mile. The types of self driving cars you are referring to are the kind being sold to consumers now, which are more like "assisted driving" than self driving. There are very few of them (i.e. they are not widely tested), they are owned by rich people (selection bias), and they ship with a giant warning not to let the car actually drive itself without supervision. So you're really testing the crash rate of wealthy educated people with driving assistance against the rest of humanity without assistance, it is no wonder the deaths are lower. The type I am referring to are the ones that actually drive themselves, the shipping trucks and whatnot. > If we heavily regulate self-driving cars, we will slow down self-driving cars development. Cars will probably be safer, but the number of cars will be smaller, thus number of deaths will be higher. This simply restates the point I made originally: we will be able to make them safe, but we will choose not to for whatever reason.