2 ms·
> I'm waiting for a car that is able to handle https://www.kttc.com/2022/11/29/current-minnesota-iowa-road- https://www.kttc.com/2022/11/29/current-minnesota-io
by ajross 3y ago
> I'm waiting for a car that is able to handle https://www.kttc.com/2022/11/29/current-minnesota-iowa-road- https://www.kttc.com/2022/11/29/current-minnesota-iowa-road-... without having cell phone connectivity in night time conditions because that more closely resembles my evening commute for a season of the year.
If you're going to be in the car, why? I mean, what if someone offered you a car that would drive you around except in comically cherry picked conditions of unplowed roads during active snowstorms? Drive yourself if there's snow on the ground[1].
This just seems like a specious and silly argument about vehicle autonomy to me.
[1] Or, in fact, don't. Because that shit's dangerous and you know it, no matter how much you protest that the upper midwest is cold. Stay off the roads in snowstorms and let the emergency crews clear the roads, it's their job.
- shagie 3y agoIt's not the utility that I have issue with. It's the claim "driverless cars may already be safer than human drivers" because it leaves out the criteria. I'll accept "driverless cars may already be safer than human drivers when driving in urban conditions in San Francisco or Phoenix." No problem. The unqualified statement however - I haven't seen anything saying (or even attempting to claim) that it is safer than humans when driving in Minneapolis at 5pm on December 1st, 2023. I'm still waiting for the unqualified statement to be attempted to even see if it holds up.