2 ms·

But that is the point... if we don't do something here, humans can continue to take their own actions to resolve the situation (speed up with traffic or move to

But that is the point... if we don't do something here, humans can continue to take their own actions to resolve the situation (speed up with traffic or move to the right or choose an alternate route). That level of flexibility allows for each person to make the choice they want and feel comfortable with (as opposed to the car making a decision for you)

dionidium 5y ago
Let's be clear here that "letting the car make the decision for you" in context means "you can't go as fast as you want in an urban area because the car will prevent it." As in, you can't drive many multiples of the speed limit in urbanized areas packed with buildings and pedestrians and other cars. The car should prevent that in practically all cases. The car does know that that's a good idea in practically every conceivable case. A human driver who thinks they should drive many multiples of the speed limit in an urban area is wrong. It's so manifestly wrong that it shouldn't even be technically possible. There's no good reason to manufacture a car that responds so stupidly to such a dangerous and irresponsible input. And when the day finally comes that the conditions are just right so that a driver dies attempting to flee an avalanche because this tech prevented them from escaping at speed, we will put a lone checkmark in the "lives lost to this technology" column that's adjacent to a "lives saved" file 10 miles long. If I could be permitted just a little bit of levity: https://twitter.com/dril/status/464802196060917762?lang=en https://twitter.com/dril/status/464802196060917762?lang=en