3 ms·

Why would you exclude them? They're relevant.

• 8organicbits 3y ago
  We're approaching a time when people get to choose to drive themselves vs use a self-driving car, and that decision is personal. There's a lot of nuance hidden in these statistics. If a self-driving car is slightly safer than drink driving, but otherwise slightly worse than the average sober driver, that's relevant to people who never drink. Using a self-driving car would, statistically, lower their personal safety given those assumptions. From another angle, imagine if we could aggressively ban drink drivers from the road, enforce regular eye exams, suspend the licenses of speeders, etc. Currently the lack of alternate transportation options makes these policies unpopular. Banning a driver could make it difficult for someone to commute to work, for example. Banning poor eye-sight could isolate the elderly. It's "too harsh". If affordable self-driving cars were an option (or damn it... public transit...) then these policies would likely have public support. So there could be a future where the bottom x% of drivers aren't allowed to drive.