5 ms·
True, but self driving cars have to be much better drivers than the average human for multiple reasons. If a human has bad driving habits you can fine him or
by bnegreve 12y ago
True, but self driving cars have to be much better drivers than the average human for multiple reasons.
If a human has bad driving habits you can fine him or revoke his driving license without impacting the rest of the drivers. A bug is a self driving software would require to stop all the self driving cars at the same time. Obviously, that would be a problem.
Bad drivers only drive one car at a time and thus they have limited potential impact. Again, a bug in the deployed driving software would impact many more cars, with consequences multiplied by the number of cars. This could have disastrous human consequences, thus more care must be taken.
Finally, human are legally responsible, if something bad happen they can compensate for the damage caused. This is unclear who would be responsible in case of self driving cars.
- StavrosK 12y agoWe aren't talking about bugs, though, we're talking about cars not being able to navigate as well. That doesn't mean they're useless, it probably just means that they would have to drive very slowly at those conditions.
- runeks 12y agoI think the scary parts come when we have to define the "max risk" threshold of the self-driving car. No matter how good a self-driving car is at estimating risk, it is only able to do that: estimate risk. It cannot know, beforehand, if an accident will happen. So the question becomes: if the car estimates a 0.001% risk of accidents happening at 40 mph on a certain stretch of road, and a 0.01% risk of an accident happening at 60 mph, how fast do we drive? Or do we just make the person who sets the risk tolerance of the self-driving car liable for any accidents that might happen, and let them set whichever risk tolerance they prefer?