5 ms·

And so it’s ok to break traffic rules? In my country, as a human this will get you easily a one month license suspension.

smallmancontrov 1y ago
No, just a bit of perspective. I'm sure the video record of your car would be squeaky clean with no violations whatsoever.
- pixelpoet 1y ago
  If I said I've never had a driver's licence, can we get back to the topic at hand? What's the thesis here, humans are imperfect drivers and therefore we should accept self driving cars driving into incoming traffic, and if anyone objects, focus on their faults instead?
  - smallmancontrov 1y ago
    We allow imperfect humans, we should allow similarly imperfect robots. The robots will get better. The humans, in aggregate, will not.
    - vhcr 1y ago
      Humans on the aggregate can definitely get better, that's why Norway has 2.14 / 100k traffic-related deaths per year and the United States has 12.84 / 100k.
      - smallmancontrov 1y ago
        Norwegians drive half as much. Even if we ignore the other components of the gap, closing that 50% will require rebuilding 300000 square km of urban sprawl into dense urban centers with good public transit. It's a nice thought, but my money is on the robots.
        timeon 1y ago
        Robots are not going to fix other problems with sprawl. People there are focusing on wrong solutions.
        smallmancontrov 1y ago
        The "human drivers are shit" problem kills a million people every year. Solving it is good. If we let the great be the enemy of the good we will never fix anything.
- int_19h 1y ago
  It's not a binary. That particular case is pretty egregious since the car signals to turn, gets into the turn lane, actually starts turning, and then swerves back (across the oncoming traffic lanes in the middle of an intersection!) and tries to get back into the correct lane to drive straight, but only manages to achieve that after driving for a bit in the lane for oncoming traffic. That is a major fuckup. And this all happens on a road with fresh clear marking, on a sunny day with perfect visibility.

smallmancontrov 1y ago

No, just a bit of perspective. I'm sure the video record of your car would be squeaky clean with no violations whatsoever.

pixelpoet 1y ago
If I said I've never had a driver's licence, can we get back to the topic at hand? What's the thesis here, humans are imperfect drivers and therefore we should accept self driving cars driving into incoming traffic, and if anyone objects, focus on their faults instead?
- smallmancontrov 1y ago
  We allow imperfect humans, we should allow similarly imperfect robots. The robots will get better. The humans, in aggregate, will not.
  - vhcr 1y ago
    Humans on the aggregate can definitely get better, that's why Norway has 2.14 / 100k traffic-related deaths per year and the United States has 12.84 / 100k.
    - smallmancontrov 1y ago
      Norwegians drive half as much. Even if we ignore the other components of the gap, closing that 50% will require rebuilding 300000 square km of urban sprawl into dense urban centers with good public transit. It's a nice thought, but my money is on the robots.
      - timeon 1y ago
        Robots are not going to fix other problems with sprawl. People there are focusing on wrong solutions.
        smallmancontrov 1y ago
        The "human drivers are shit" problem kills a million people every year. Solving it is good. If we let the great be the enemy of the good we will never fix anything.
int_19h 1y ago
It's not a binary. That particular case is pretty egregious since the car signals to turn, gets into the turn lane, actually starts turning, and then swerves back (across the oncoming traffic lanes in the middle of an intersection!) and tries to get back into the correct lane to drive straight, but only manages to achieve that after driving for a bit in the lane for oncoming traffic. That is a major fuckup. And this all happens on a road with fresh clear marking, on a sunny day with perfect visibility.