3 ms·
Let's say you have 1000 self-driving long-haul trips that have an accident rate of anywhere from 0.1*A to 10*A (where A is the rate of accidents with human driv
by pcthrowaway 4y ago
Let's say you have 1000 self-driving long-haul trips that have an accident rate of anywhere from 0.1*A to 10*A (where A is the rate of accidents with human drivers) with just self-driving.
Let's say 100% of the time there is an accident, the self-driving system is able to determine with at least 1 second of notice that human intervention could make the upcoming segment of the trip safer, and such flagged sections constitute less than 0.1% of the time the vehicle would otherwise be in operation.
Let's also say a highly trained team of 10 people, monitoring that fleet of 1000 vehicles, selected for fast reaction, and with adequate training could theoretically prevent 99% of at-fault incidents, bringing it down to a range of 0.001*A to 0.1*A.
I don't know if this would actually play out, but if the above assumptions were found to be accurate, then it'd be hard to make an argument for having human drivers in the vehicle when this system at scale could reduce at-fault accidents to <10% of the current rate
Think Mechanical Turk meets Lambda for improving self-driving car safety