3 ms·
>easier just to keep a human around on more dangerous routes. On the contrary, payouts for a driver taken hostage, injured, or killed on company business would
by superuser2 11y ago
>easier just to keep a human around on more dangerous routes.
On the contrary, payouts for a driver taken hostage, injured, or killed on company business would be immense. Insurance companies would probably be quite happy about crimes taking place without humans getting hurt anymore.
- jjoonathan 11y ago"Save money on the average payout and you save money overall" is a decent argument if and only if the number of payouts remains fixed, which it most certainly won't. Having a human present is a significant deterrent against robbing in the first place and against liberal use of firearms because if things go south with a human present then the charge is murder. A robotic truck presents no such deterrent. Lower the risk of knocking off a truck, and more trucks will get knocked off. I'm not saying it can't be solved, I'm just saying that the solution won't be "buy insurance."