I’m confused by sf. They did this for Uber in 2016, Amazon’s zoox, and a host of other companies, etc. Tesla has a safety record that’s not unimpressive compar

I’m confused by sf. They did this for Uber in 2016, Amazon’s zoox, and a host of other companies, etc. Tesla has a safety record that’s not unimpressive compared to the 36k people who die every year even though their failures have been more public and newsworthy. Their stats have been relatively objective. We also have a framework for this: https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicl... As there is a framework in place already, shouldn’t we push forward? As long as we are reducing the statistical risk of driving below the risk of human drivers, shouldn’t that be the litmus for whether these programs are allowed to progress? I know I am being simplistic, and I understand that no statistical model will ever make up for the loss of a family member, the generally accepted foundation for the morality of self-driving car technologies hinges on whether they can beat the human-driven statistical equivalent. If there is concern about that they shouldn’t continue. But if there isn’t, these experiments should progress as they could ultimately reduce mortality. There were 3,723 deaths in California in 2020. The lifetime odds of dying in a motor-vehicle crash for a person born in 2019 were 1 in 107. These odds suck. Is that really acceptable? Can we do better? We know we can. If we can reduce that number we should. If we can’t, we should restrict this technology’s rollout until it can. Am I overly objective? I’m not an expert. I mean ultimately I want legislation built on objective data and loving values with human compassion at the core. I feel like sometimes we see these decisions based on how fast the system can adapt the ocean of existing automotive and roadway regulatory compliance to the technology changes, rather than new realities. People have no idea how much the books and legal cases that many cal trans engineers have spent their lives developing stand in the way of self-driving vehicles. I honestly think the biggest issue is probably the legal a s regulatory overhead of responding to the technology rather than the technology itself, but since it’s so hard to quantify I don’t often bring this up. But the biggest passion I have seen if from those same engineering minds, who truly understand the complexity, but also want to see it happen. Their timeframes are just long. I’ve heard 2045 and 2050. Anyone more expert than I care to weigh in? I’d love to learn more. I am not trying to weigh in with any merit — I am a nubile entrant and simply sharing the output of conversation with people who will always be more qualified and I, but I’d love to learn more about this.