5 ms·

Humans make a lot of mistakes. Full self driving cars can not afford to make those mistakes. It has to be better than humans by a significant amount or you can

Humans make a lot of mistakes. Full self driving cars can not afford to make those mistakes. It has to be better than humans by a significant amount or you can forget adoption.

josephcsible 5y ago
The issue with human drivers isn't that we can't see well enough. It's that we're easily distracted and have slow reaction times. A self-driving car can be way better than human drivers without needing special cameras or other sensors that would give it superhuman vision.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  We could also just continue legislation and enforcement of distracted driving. The touch interfaces in cars have really been a step backwards in this regard.
  - sschueller 5y ago
    In Switzerland we have very strict laws regarding just using navigation equipment or eating while driving. Yet for whatever reason cars with touch interfaces hiding important features are permitted.
- ddingus 5y ago
  Revisit this when we have actual AI to consider.
the8472 5y ago
Arguably self driving cars can unlock a lot of utility which means that they don't really have to be better, they could even be worse than the average human driver still be a utilitarian improvement. Consider autonomously dropping off children (freeing up parents), providing more mobility to the disabled and elderly and perhaps even reducing the overall number of cars that have to be owned (and thus produced). If we consider every minute spent in front of a steering wheel a minute wasted then it would even save many QALYs.
- kwhitefoot 5y ago
  For a lot of people those minutes behind the wheel are amongst the few minutes in the day that they feel like they are free agents. Not every minute spent in front of a steering wheel is wasted.
  - the8472 5y ago
    Perhaps, but that doesn't fundamentally change my argument. Those people can keep driving if they like it but for everyone else it can still free up time and thus be counted towards the benefits.

Humans make a lot of mistakes. Full self driving cars can not afford to make those mistakes. It has to be better than humans by a significant amount or you can forget adoption.

josephcsible 5y ago

The issue with human drivers isn't that we can't see well enough. It's that we're easily distracted and have slow reaction times. A self-driving car can be way better than human drivers without needing special cameras or other sensors that would give it superhuman vision.

bobthepanda 5y ago
We could also just continue legislation and enforcement of distracted driving. The touch interfaces in cars have really been a step backwards in this regard.
- sschueller 5y ago
  In Switzerland we have very strict laws regarding just using navigation equipment or eating while driving. Yet for whatever reason cars with touch interfaces hiding important features are permitted.
ddingus 5y ago
Revisit this when we have actual AI to consider.

the8472 5y ago

Arguably self driving cars can unlock a lot of utility which means that they don't really have to be better, they could even be worse than the average human driver still be a utilitarian improvement. Consider autonomously dropping off children (freeing up parents), providing more mobility to the disabled and elderly and perhaps even reducing the overall number of cars that have to be owned (and thus produced). If we consider every minute spent in front of a steering wheel a minute wasted then it would even save many QALYs.

kwhitefoot 5y ago
For a lot of people those minutes behind the wheel are amongst the few minutes in the day that they feel like they are free agents. Not every minute spent in front of a steering wheel is wasted.
- the8472 5y ago
  Perhaps, but that doesn't fundamentally change my argument. Those people can keep driving if they like it but for everyone else it can still free up time and thus be counted towards the benefits.