I prefer to have humans be responsible and licensed.
We can automate planes trains and ships before highways.
IMO the desire to automate driving is far too ambitious and unnecessary.
Just my two cents…
Computers are already a better driver than you are. Don’t believe me? Buy a computer driving simulation game, set the AI to hard and try and beat one. And that isn’t even considering most accidents are the result of ignoring traffic safety laws or inattention/distraction, neither of which humans can outperform computers on.
When the computer does err…who is held responsible?
Depends, what level of autonomy are you talking about? If you don’t know what I mean by level
1 Like
Every level, just as in this case the humans will fault the technology which cannot be held accountable. This has the potential to be a liability nightmare, even if the automated functions fail at a lower rate than humans.
All of this for what? So we can pay LESS attention while driving…
Well they can certainly try, but they will fail in court for any level that explicitly still requires the driver to be in charge of the vehicle. And while being able to do other things instead of driving while you travel in your car will be of great personal and economic benefit, it isn’t the only reason to want and accept such technology. Lower traffic fatalities is another. Ask any motorcycle driver what they think of human drivers ability to pay attention to their driving. Look at the millions of wrecks and deaths caused by humans failure to pay attention. The ability to focus on one task without becoming tired, distracted or prone to more error is just something computers are far better suited to do than humans are.
Agreed.
But given the low numbers of automated cars out there, and the # fatal accidents, I’m not sure we can say how safe they are.
Purely anecdotal of course. Someone needs to do the math correctly before deciding this.
Well, that and fewer traffic fatalities.
As I said though, I don’t know what those numbers really are.
Personally, I welcome the opportunity to drive - particularly long trips - without having to pay close attention 100% of the time. Would make travel more enjoyable and make far off destinations more attainable.
Again, you want to pay just as close attention as you would if you were controlling your speed or lane centering right now. Those features are not a substitution for driver awareness, they are good for relieving physical discomfort, not a substitute for driver awareness. I trust them the same way I trust the cruise control we have had for decades, which is to say, I trust them as long as my foot is a fraction of a second away from the brake pedal that disengages it.
Yes, but just that level of assistance would make things like 6 hour drives a lot less taxing. I welcome it.
Same here. I hope you are prepared for democrats to oppose this tech though because in the end it’s going to cost a lot of teamsters their jobs.
Why? As you rightfully point out, you still need someone behind the wheel. At least at this point we do!
Maybe 25 years from now we would trust completely driverless vehicles, but not for now.
I don’t disagree, but on the other hand, the term autopilot has been used for pilot assist with both airplanes and ships for decades, but they do not avoid hazards. All they do is maintain the course at the set speed, just like the Tesla system.
That brings up a point. There is a strong argument to be made that all prospective car drivers should first drive a motorcycle for a year before they are licensed to operate a car. There is no better way (IMO) to learn defensive driving skills.