3 ms·
> the comparison should be relative to number of equivalent human driving hours Not necessarily, this would be true if autopilot made the same kinds of mistake
by taylodl 3y ago
> the comparison should be relative to number of equivalent human driving hours
Not necessarily, this would be true if autopilot made the same kinds of mistakes that humans do - these are the kinds of mistakes that other humans, e.g. other drivers, motorcyclists, bicyclists, pedestrians, are on the lookout for. That is to say we're very experienced with the kinds of mistakes humans make and the conditions in which they make them, and so we can defend ourselves against them. If autopilot is making all-new mistakes under totally different conditions then it removes that ability to defend ones self and lead to even more issues. We humans have a keen sense for how other humans will react in a given situation.
- dgrin91 3y agoDo we have the ability to defend ourselves? How do you defend against a drunk driver? Lots of people die to random car crashes because they aren't able to defend themselves. The promising thing I've always thought about self driving is that while it may make stupid, unpredictable mistakes (drive into flashing firetruck at 60mph) it does this less than a typically human driver would make typical human casualty inflicting mistakes. Moreover we can build & improve to eliminate firetruck ramming; we unfortunately have not been able to eliminate drunk driving.
- taylodl 3y agoWe've been unwilling to eliminate drunk driving. Breathalyzer ignition lock? Problem solved. Self-driving cars are an extremely poor solution (complexity and cost) to solve this simple problem. People have fought tooth and nail to enable drunk driving - and they've won. Just like they're fighting and winning for mass shootings. Even so, drunk drivers are largely predictable. People know when it's not a good time to be on the streets.