> Why should they have to pass the median? Because you have to convince people like me to buy a self-driving car, and as long as that car is more likely to get

> Why should they have to pass the median? Because you have to convince people like me to buy a self-driving car, and as long as that car is more likely to get me killed than I am, my family will remain in a car that I drive. I do not drive drunk, I avoid driving in inclement weather when not required, or at night, or when I'm really tired. I don't race, I don't road rage, I am a very defensive driver. I have not had an at-fault accident ever (in 30 years and counting since I got my license) and the only accidents I've ever been in at all were minor fender-benders. So convince me why I should endanger myself so that you can have an unsafe computer driven auto on the road? > Right and it would be great if those people used self driving cars instead. So make a self-driving car for them. You will need to subsidize it, since these types of drivers are more likely than not unable to afford a fancy new toy. When the technology can finally cross the median point, then we can talk again about regular, good drivers hanging up their keys.