But you can't make a bot that reasons like a human currently. They don't understand intent, and I'm pretty sure it will be a heck of a long time until that def

But you can't make a bot that reasons like a human currently. They don't understand intent, and I'm pretty sure it will be a heck of a long time until that deficiency is overcome. Having been programming for upwards of 40 years now, there is one fundamental truth in programming that all developers need to understand and remember: untested code is untrusted code. Take all the gazillions of corner cases that occur when driving: how many of them do you think are actually tested by the various self driving "solutions" on the market right now? Do they have a test case for a tire coming off the trailer of a transport bouncing down the road? What if a tire is bouncing down a road perpendicular to the one your driving? What if it's on a sidewalk? It will take decades before self driving cars are well tested. The current approach of falling back to the driver for the "hard" cases doesn't work. Spend some time watching shows like Mayday that delve into root cause analysis of airplane crashes. Accidents happen not because of any one single event, but a chain of events interacting that combine to result in something horrific. This is also the case in nuclear accidents, and in software driven tragedies like the Therac 25. Any software developer working on self driving cars that hasn't spent a good deal of time looking back at past system failures that have killed humans should bloody well not be working on self driving cars. Makings roads easier for bots is not a solution to the massive complexity of self driving vehicles.