> Until they're driving everywhere humans drive, I don't see how it's possible to make any such comparison. You raise a good point but surely it's at least pos

> Until they're driving everywhere humans drive, I don't see how it's possible to make any such comparison. You raise a good point but surely it's at least possible to compare the safety records of driverless cars vs. human operated cars within the domain that driverless cars typically operate. One way to do that would be to only examine all trips, human and driverless, that occur entirely within a bounded area that driverless cars are known to operate. Another option would be to look at the total safety record of a city like SF in the years prior to widespread driverless car usage and in the years after common adoption and see if there is a broad reduction in accidents generally. Apropos of this, the other day I was thinking about the adoption of mobile devices. Originally the unadorned word "phone" referred to a wired home/office telephone, and if you needed to refer to a mobile device, you'd say, call me on my mobile/cellphone. Over the course of a generation it's now that if you say "phone," the assumption is that you are talking about a mobile device, and the exceptions become either landline or office phone. It makes me wonder how long, if ever, it will be until "car" almost universally refers to driverless vehicles, and you'll need to say "manual car," "meatmobile," or something similar to those to refer to a human-driven vehicle.