7 ms·

Mean is the relevant metric, though. If it's only the bottom 10% of human drivers who cause all crashes and driverless cars are as safe as the 20p human driver,

Mean is the relevant metric, though. If it's only the bottom 10% of human drivers who cause all crashes and driverless cars are as safe as the 20p human driver, you can replace all human drivers with autonomous ones and eliminate all crashes. That's to say nothing of the fact that driverless cars will improve from their current level, and the fact that companies operating them can be held liable for crashes and forced to account for their actions in a way that the worst human drivers cannot (which provides a strong incentive for them to improve).

cozzyd 3y ago
you can more easily prevent the bottom 10% from driving by more rigorous driving standards / more stringent revocation of licenses.
- scarmig 3y ago
  About a month ago a human driver ran into me while I was riding a bike and sped away (luckily I was unharmed, aside from a scrape or two). How exactly would stricter driving tests or revocation of licenses have prevented that? If a Waymo had done that, on the other hand, it'd have stopped and I'd be getting a nice big check from Google.
  - cozzyd 3y ago
    traffic enforcement cameras (e.g. automatic tickets for speeding, running red lights, hitting cyclists etc.) would probably help, but for some reason motorists are against that. I guess the nice thing about robocars is that they can be effectively regulated not to drive at unsafe speeds (though probably people would be mad about that too...).
    - tiltowait 3y ago
      Red light cameras don't seem to increase safety: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras-may-not-make-streets-safer/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras... Motorists hate them because they're a money grab from local municipalities.
      - cozzyd 3y ago
        Rear end crashes are much more survivable than t-bones though, and this study doesn't consider pedestrian injuries. To me it sounds like the cameras should also be fining people who are stopping too quickly, as it implies they were going at an unsafe speed for the condition. Anyway, relatively few people run red lights. Speed cameras would likely have a much higher safety return.
        Thlom 3y ago
        Unless you move them around drivers will just slow down at the camera and then commence speeding. What works is strategically placed cameras that measure average speed over a distance. We have these a few places in Norway and most people stick to the speed limit or a bit below between the cameras.
        taeric 3y ago
        Reading your first sentence, I immediately thought "this is easy to deal with using checkpointed cameras." And then I read the next part. Curious how well that works out, all told.
        cozzyd 3y ago
        it would also be relatively straightforward to require cars to self-report speeding (keep a speed/position log, have it be read out at annual inspection). There are some issues around tunnels and poor GPS geolocation in urban areas, but it would work great for things like highways...
        taeric 3y ago
        I had that exact thought as I was typing my post! :D That said, I can see many reasons that is not liked. Amusingly, as you add more and more detection systems to cars for stuff like this, you are backing into autonomous vehicles.
- yazaddaruvala 3y ago
  > According to the NHTSA, 19% of motor vehicle fatalities involved drivers with invalid licenses. Furthermore, drivers with invalid licenses comprise 13% of all drivers in fatal crashes. https://www.carinsurance.com/Articles/driving-without-license-penalties-by-state.aspx https://www.carinsurance.com/Articles/driving-without-licens... I'm all for more rigorous driving standards. However, the USA is car centric and people need jobs. To really do what you're suggesting, the USA would need to regulate car companies to validate driving licenses while the car was in use. AND THEN, the USA would need to figure out what to do with all of these upset newly unemployed and aggressive people.
  - cozzyd 3y ago
    Yes, car-centricity is a big problem, I agree (as someone who doesn't own a car or regularly drive...). Are robo-cars going to prevent people from driving with invalid licenses?
    - xboxnolifes 3y ago
      > Are robo-cars going to prevent people from driving with invalid licenses Yes. Because they wouldn't be driving.
      - cozzyd 3y ago
        unless human-operated vehicles become banned or comparatively inordinately expensive, I'm not sure how that would happen? At least any time soon...
        yazaddaruvala 3y ago
        Vehicles in general are inordinately expensive. Lyft just quoted me: $20 for 3.5 miles, in 15mins. That is a reasonable daily commute. 2 * $20 = $40 per day round trip. $40 * 5 = $200 per week. $200 * 50 = $10,000 per year. For a 45 min commute: that is $30k per year. Clearly should buy a vehicle. However, with 10x cheaper Lyfts: at 1-3k per year; that is the cost of maintenance, registration, and insurance. Then the car payments on top of that... Owning a car would be inordinately expensive. This doesn't even include the benefit of getting 45-90 mins back to learn or play while commuting.
- macintux 3y ago
  After creating a society where car ownership is a necessary prerequisite to success, it’s challenging to block people from participating.
  - sclarisse 3y ago
    This is literally within the boundaries of the city of San Francisco, where having a car is only a prerequisite for success if your job is “driving”. If you’re going to lament the car-focused society we have created, I understand and sympathize emotionally — but you should really take care to relent in those places that are most like the world you would prefer.

cozzyd 3y ago

you can more easily prevent the bottom 10% from driving by more rigorous driving standards / more stringent revocation of licenses.

scarmig 3y ago
About a month ago a human driver ran into me while I was riding a bike and sped away (luckily I was unharmed, aside from a scrape or two). How exactly would stricter driving tests or revocation of licenses have prevented that? If a Waymo had done that, on the other hand, it'd have stopped and I'd be getting a nice big check from Google.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  traffic enforcement cameras (e.g. automatic tickets for speeding, running red lights, hitting cyclists etc.) would probably help, but for some reason motorists are against that. I guess the nice thing about robocars is that they can be effectively regulated not to drive at unsafe speeds (though probably people would be mad about that too...).
  - tiltowait 3y ago
    Red light cameras don't seem to increase safety: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras-may-not-make-streets-safer/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/red-light-cameras... Motorists hate them because they're a money grab from local municipalities.
    - cozzyd 3y ago
      Rear end crashes are much more survivable than t-bones though, and this study doesn't consider pedestrian injuries. To me it sounds like the cameras should also be fining people who are stopping too quickly, as it implies they were going at an unsafe speed for the condition. Anyway, relatively few people run red lights. Speed cameras would likely have a much higher safety return.
      - Thlom 3y ago
        Unless you move them around drivers will just slow down at the camera and then commence speeding. What works is strategically placed cameras that measure average speed over a distance. We have these a few places in Norway and most people stick to the speed limit or a bit below between the cameras.
        taeric 3y ago
        Reading your first sentence, I immediately thought "this is easy to deal with using checkpointed cameras." And then I read the next part. Curious how well that works out, all told.
        cozzyd 3y ago
        it would also be relatively straightforward to require cars to self-report speeding (keep a speed/position log, have it be read out at annual inspection). There are some issues around tunnels and poor GPS geolocation in urban areas, but it would work great for things like highways...
        taeric 3y ago
        I had that exact thought as I was typing my post! :D That said, I can see many reasons that is not liked. Amusingly, as you add more and more detection systems to cars for stuff like this, you are backing into autonomous vehicles.
yazaddaruvala 3y ago
> According to the NHTSA, 19% of motor vehicle fatalities involved drivers with invalid licenses. Furthermore, drivers with invalid licenses comprise 13% of all drivers in fatal crashes. https://www.carinsurance.com/Articles/driving-without-license-penalties-by-state.aspx https://www.carinsurance.com/Articles/driving-without-licens... I'm all for more rigorous driving standards. However, the USA is car centric and people need jobs. To really do what you're suggesting, the USA would need to regulate car companies to validate driving licenses while the car was in use. AND THEN, the USA would need to figure out what to do with all of these upset newly unemployed and aggressive people.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  Yes, car-centricity is a big problem, I agree (as someone who doesn't own a car or regularly drive...). Are robo-cars going to prevent people from driving with invalid licenses?
  - xboxnolifes 3y ago
    > Are robo-cars going to prevent people from driving with invalid licenses Yes. Because they wouldn't be driving.
    - cozzyd 3y ago
      unless human-operated vehicles become banned or comparatively inordinately expensive, I'm not sure how that would happen? At least any time soon...
      - yazaddaruvala 3y ago
        Vehicles in general are inordinately expensive. Lyft just quoted me: $20 for 3.5 miles, in 15mins. That is a reasonable daily commute. 2 * $20 = $40 per day round trip. $40 * 5 = $200 per week. $200 * 50 = $10,000 per year. For a 45 min commute: that is $30k per year. Clearly should buy a vehicle. However, with 10x cheaper Lyfts: at 1-3k per year; that is the cost of maintenance, registration, and insurance. Then the car payments on top of that... Owning a car would be inordinately expensive. This doesn't even include the benefit of getting 45-90 mins back to learn or play while commuting.
macintux 3y ago
After creating a society where car ownership is a necessary prerequisite to success, it’s challenging to block people from participating.
- sclarisse 3y ago
  This is literally within the boundaries of the city of San Francisco, where having a car is only a prerequisite for success if your job is “driving”. If you’re going to lament the car-focused society we have created, I understand and sympathize emotionally — but you should really take care to relent in those places that are most like the world you would prefer.