4 ms·
>We have existing solutions that don't result in these excess deaths The existing solutions <As chosen by the collective will of the American people> cause 40,
by thereisnospork 5y ago
>We have existing solutions that don't result in these excess deaths
The existing solutions <As chosen by the collective will of the American people> cause 40,000 dead Americans every year. Other 'Solutions' are not. Don't ask me why they are not, ask your neighbor, and your congressman -- but they are not. Also ask yourself how many collective minutes spent waiting for a bus is a traffic fatality worth? This isn't rhetorical, the answer is a number.
>Which bill are you talking about?
Lets start with the United States Department of Transportation, followed shortly thereafter by your state's department of transportation.
>it's just proof that we have grandfathered an extremely unsafe system here.
All the reason why a potentially new system should have to meet the safety standard of 'less unsafe' and not 'perfect'. Literally every day the adoption of self driving is delayed kills 109.6 people[0] because that's one more day of the status quo. To save lives we should be damn near throwing people in front of Teslas to help them train instead of wringing our hands over the matter.
[0]As much as, divided by the relative eventually safety of a fully developed self driving. As Americans, more globally of course.
- Karrot_Kream 5y agoI'm confused. Is the only way forward private automobiles? Did the creation of the Department of Transportation ban the creation of transit? Americans choose automobiles because of zoning laws mandating massive setbacks and minimum parking requirements. There's nothing in the DoT or my state's DoT that mandates use of a car. It's all due to American city planning, which is driven by auto friendly city planning policy. So again, why is transit out of the question here? Self-driving cars aren't an incremental improvement away. We have no idea how many more deaths are needed to mature the technology. So why are we bending over backwards for it when there are proven solutions to move people without casualty? If self driving can innovate without casualty, then be my guest.
- thereisnospork 5y ago>If self driving can innovate without casualty, then be my guest. You would kill tens of thousands of people a year with that policy decision.
- admax88qqq 5y ago> To save lives we should be damn near throwing people in front of Teslas to help them train instead of wringing our hands over the matter. The unstated assumption in this is that self-driving is feasible with current technology and without enough training will be better than human drivers.