5 ms·

This should be calibrated to the risk the top X% of cautious/safe drivers, and exclude reckless, inexperienced, or intoxicated drivers. As a safe driver, you sh

This should be calibrated to the risk the top X% of cautious/safe drivers, and exclude reckless, inexperienced, or intoxicated drivers. As a safe driver, you shouldn't have to accept risk calibrated to "average" (i.e. drunk, reckless) driver.

Isinlor 6y ago
Nobody will be forcing you to buy self-driving car for quite a while. But as a safe driver, you should care about eliminating the most unsafe drivers from the roads.
- falcolas 6y ago
  As a self-identified safe driver, no action I am capable of taking will put an unsafe driver in a self-driving car. I'll even go so far to say that many unsafe drivers can't afford a self-driving car. They're often unsafe because their car is on balding tires, the brakes don't work, and the tail lights are busted. The rest, well, they simply enjoy driving unsafely and thus have no reason to get into a self-driving car.
tgv 6y ago
Exactly. Because now we can punish those individual drivers, lock them up, take away their car and license, but are we going to pull the plug on all cars with auto-pilot X because X is causing accidents? Is a small change in the software enough to establish it as a new driver? It's "smoking is good for you" all over again.
the8472 6y ago
Why should it be? In the end the dead bodies count and it doesn't matter whether a cautious or inexperienced driver killed them. Inexperienced drivers are prerequisite of experienced drivers, there's no way to get rid of them. Excluding them from statistics is just discounting those deaths as... somehow less important? If a self-driving vehicle is only 1.5x (instead of 5x) as safe as the average human driver then you're not trading between death by humans vs. death by machine, you're primarily trading between death by human and spared by machine and only secondly between the former.
- degrews 6y ago
  > In the end the dead bodies count and it doesn't matter whether a cautious or inexperienced driver killed them It matters to the safe drivers. Bad drivers are mostly a danger to themselves. At only "1.5x as safe as average", it's a good deal for the bad drivers, but there are probably a lot of "2x as safe as average" drivers that are getting a bad deal. They are in more danger than before. Edited for clarity.
  - dunefox 6y ago
    > Bad drivers are mostly a danger to themselves. Source? It seems only logical that the number of accidental deaths goes up with the number of bad drivers on the road - not just because they kill themselves.
    - degrews 6y ago
      I just mean that a disproportionate amount of the danger created by bad drivers is to themselves. I don't have a source, but I think this is obvious. My point is that, even if we lower the total death count, the safest drivers could still end up at greater risk, because a disproportionate amount of the reduction in deaths will go to bad drivers.
    - sliken 6y ago
      The most common accidents are a car hitting a non-car.
      - dunefox 6y ago
        Source?
        sliken 6y ago
        IIHS says "Nationwide, 53 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths in 2018 occurred in single-vehicle crashes." The other categories being multi-vehicle and property only.
908B64B197 6y ago
I've questioned the lack of driving experience as a risk factor since the pool of experienced driver excludes those who died becoming experienced. Assuming someone has a certain (constant) probability of excluding himself from the driving pool every year, over time the average percentage will drop as folks most susceptible from excluding themselves will have already done so.
dunefox 6y ago
No, on the contrary: deaths through those drivers can be eliminated. It only makes sense to look at total number of deaths, including by alcohol, drugs, inexperienced drivers, elderly drivers, distracted drivers (smartphone, etc.).
grecy 6y ago
> As a safe driver, you shouldn't have to accept risk calibrated to "average" (i.e. drunk, reckless) driver. But you already do. Every day you're near a road, there is chance the next vehicle around the bend is drunk or reckless or using their phone. It doesn't even matter if you are in a vehicle or not - even as a pedestrian you already deal with them every day. It sucks, but it's reality.

Isinlor 6y ago

Nobody will be forcing you to buy self-driving car for quite a while. But as a safe driver, you should care about eliminating the most unsafe drivers from the roads.

falcolas 6y ago
As a self-identified safe driver, no action I am capable of taking will put an unsafe driver in a self-driving car. I'll even go so far to say that many unsafe drivers can't afford a self-driving car. They're often unsafe because their car is on balding tires, the brakes don't work, and the tail lights are busted. The rest, well, they simply enjoy driving unsafely and thus have no reason to get into a self-driving car.

tgv 6y ago

Exactly. Because now we can punish those individual drivers, lock them up, take away their car and license, but are we going to pull the plug on all cars with auto-pilot X because X is causing accidents? Is a small change in the software enough to establish it as a new driver? It's "smoking is good for you" all over again.

the8472 6y ago

Why should it be? In the end the dead bodies count and it doesn't matter whether a cautious or inexperienced driver killed them. Inexperienced drivers are prerequisite of experienced drivers, there's no way to get rid of them. Excluding them from statistics is just discounting those deaths as... somehow less important? If a self-driving vehicle is only 1.5x (instead of 5x) as safe as the average human driver then you're not trading between death by humans vs. death by machine, you're primarily trading between death by human and spared by machine and only secondly between the former.

degrews 6y ago
> In the end the dead bodies count and it doesn't matter whether a cautious or inexperienced driver killed them It matters to the safe drivers. Bad drivers are mostly a danger to themselves. At only "1.5x as safe as average", it's a good deal for the bad drivers, but there are probably a lot of "2x as safe as average" drivers that are getting a bad deal. They are in more danger than before. Edited for clarity.
- dunefox 6y ago
  > Bad drivers are mostly a danger to themselves. Source? It seems only logical that the number of accidental deaths goes up with the number of bad drivers on the road - not just because they kill themselves.
  - degrews 6y ago
    I just mean that a disproportionate amount of the danger created by bad drivers is to themselves. I don't have a source, but I think this is obvious. My point is that, even if we lower the total death count, the safest drivers could still end up at greater risk, because a disproportionate amount of the reduction in deaths will go to bad drivers.
  - sliken 6y ago
    The most common accidents are a car hitting a non-car.
    - dunefox 6y ago
      Source?
      - sliken 6y ago
        IIHS says "Nationwide, 53 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths in 2018 occurred in single-vehicle crashes." The other categories being multi-vehicle and property only.

908B64B197 6y ago

I've questioned the lack of driving experience as a risk factor since the pool of experienced driver excludes those who died becoming experienced. Assuming someone has a certain (constant) probability of excluding himself from the driving pool every year, over time the average percentage will drop as folks most susceptible from excluding themselves will have already done so.

dunefox 6y ago

No, on the contrary: deaths through those drivers can be eliminated. It only makes sense to look at total number of deaths, including by alcohol, drugs, inexperienced drivers, elderly drivers, distracted drivers (smartphone, etc.).

grecy 6y ago

> As a safe driver, you shouldn't have to accept risk calibrated to "average" (i.e. drunk, reckless) driver. But you already do. Every day you're near a road, there is chance the next vehicle around the bend is drunk or reckless or using their phone. It doesn't even matter if you are in a vehicle or not - even as a pedestrian you already deal with them every day. It sucks, but it's reality.