Forum Settings
Forums

Evidence self driving cars are safe. Thoughts?

New
Oct 3, 11:05 PM
#1

Offline
May 2019
2507
It seems like the technology is here, and I'm sure it will only get better over time. Autonomous vehicles have been allowed to run in some US cities and research has been done on their safety.

This paper examines the safety performance of the Waymo Driver, an SAE level 4 automated driving system (ADS) used in a rider-only (RO) ride-hailing application without a human driver, either in the vehicle or remotely. ADS crash data was derived from NHTSA's Standing General Order (SGO) reporting over 7.14 million RO miles through the end of October 2023 in Phoenix, AZ, San Francisco, CA, and Los Angeles, CA. When considering all locations together, the any-injury-reported crashed vehicle rate was 0.6 incidents per million miles (IPMM) for the ADS vs 2.80 IPMM for the human benchmark, an 80% reductionor a human crash rate that is 5 times higher than the ADS rate. Police-reported crashed vehicle rates for all locations together were 2.1 IPMM for the ADS vs. 4.68 IPMM for the human benchmark, a 55% reduction or a human crash rate that was 2.2 times higher than the ADS rate. Police-reported and any-injury-reported crashed vehicle rate reductions for the ADS were statistically significant when compared in San Francisco and Phoenix, as well as combined across all locations (except for any-injury-reported in Phoenix). The any property damage or injury comparison had statistically significant decrease in 3 comparisons, but also non-significant results in 3 other benchmarks. Given imprecision in the benchmark estimate and multiple potential sources of underreporting biasing the benchmarks, caution should be taken when interpreting the results of the any property damage or injury comparison. Together, these crash-rate results should be interpreted as a directional and continuous confidence growth indicator, together with other methodologies, in a safety case approach.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.12675

As driverless automated driving systems (ADS) start to operate on public roads, there is an urgent need to understand how safely these systems are managing real-world traffic conditions. With data from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) becoming available for Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) operating in California with and without human drivers, there is an initial basis for comparing ADS and human driving safety.
This paper analyzes the crash rates and characteristics for three types of driving: Uber ridesharing trips from the CPUC TNC Annual Report in 2020, supervised autonomous vehicles (AV) driving from the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) between December 2020 and November 2022, driverless ADS pilot (testing) and deployment (revenue service) program from Waymo and Cruise between March 2022 and August 2023. All of the driving was done within the city of San Francisco, excluding freeways. The same geographical confinement allows for controlling the exposure to vulnerable road users, population density, speed limit, and other external factors such as weather and road conditions. The study finds that supervised AV has almost equivalent crashes per million miles (CPMM) as Uber human driving, the driverless Waymo AV has a lower CPMM, and the driverless Cruise AV has a higher CPMM than Uber human driving. The data samples are not yet large enough to support conclusions about whether the current automated systems are more or less safe than human-operated vehicles in the complex San Francisco urban environment.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14648

A study ran by an insurance company found that Waymo autonomous vehicles get less liability claims.

Swiss Re's extensive dataset, which includes more than 500,000 claims covering more than 200 billion miles of exposure, was used as a benchmark to compare human driving performance against Waymo's autonomous technology. The findings are staggering:

88% reduction in property damage claims for Waymo's autonomous fleet compared to human-driven vehicles.
92% reduction in bodily injury claims, further cementing the safety advantage of autonomous driving.

https://evmagazine.com/self-drive/waymos-avs-safer-than-human-drivers-swiss-re-study-finds

Driving a car is one of the most dangerous things people do regarding themselves and others. Globally about a million people a year die due to car accidents. For comparison, about half a million people are murdered a year.

What do you think of these developments? Are you excited to be able to goof off more in traffic? Perhaps the freedom to pleasure drive overrides your concerns about personal and public safety?
FreshellOct 3, 11:18 PM
Oct 3, 11:22 PM
#2

Offline
Aug 2023
151
Why is there no poll this time?​​
Oct 3, 11:29 PM
#3
Nostalgia Rules!

Offline
Jun 2008
14433
Honestly I don't care how much evidence there is about how safe they are, I never get in one that's in motion. O.O
Oct 4, 2:05 AM
#4

Online
Sep 2016
22031
If it's safe enough then I'm in favor of it, because drivers have considerably more time available to do something else instead of driving.
*kappa*
Oct 5, 2:41 AM
#5

Offline
May 2018
1386
I like the idea of self-dricing cars. As long as it's not a Tesla as those cars are shit

Also self-driving would make the need for a owned car smaller and I want a world of community owned vehicles
Oct 5, 4:20 AM
#6
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
I have no concerns, I'm excited, I'm ok to sacrifice my enjoyment of driving, and I'm more than happy for it to be Tesla, because it's nearly a perfect car already.

But for the best outcome, we need separate infrastructure for them, where idiots are not allowed.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 5, 4:22 AM
#7

Offline
Feb 2021
269
While the technology is cool. I still prefer to drive myself.

It might be safer... but jesus, it's going to be expensive to fix once it breaks.

Protect the smile!

Oct 5, 4:42 AM
#8

Online
Feb 2020
8706
Here's goes my best PR response. I'm sure that their entirely safe, until they crash into something.
Oct 5, 4:59 AM
#9

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Actually driving a car is easier and safer for humans than trying to supervise an automated system.
They should just build more trains instead...
Oct 5, 4:59 AM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to Nysse
I like the idea of self-dricing cars. As long as it's not a Tesla as those cars are shit

Also self-driving would make the need for a owned car smaller and I want a world of community owned vehicles
@Nysse Trains. What you are describing is trains.
Oct 5, 5:07 AM

Offline
May 2018
1386
Reply to JaniSIr
@Nysse Trains. What you are describing is trains.
@JaniSIr yeah you're right and I like trains. Problem is trains need tracks and normal roads can take people to more places. So trains but with wheels. Pretty much my dream commute
Oct 5, 5:12 AM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to Nysse
@JaniSIr yeah you're right and I like trains. Problem is trains need tracks and normal roads can take people to more places. So trains but with wheels. Pretty much my dream commute
@Nysse That's just a bus. And the dedicated track is important, that's what makes trains fast, while buses tend to just get stuck in traffic in USA.
Oct 5, 5:23 AM
resident arbiter

Offline
Oct 2015
6816
Posts #5 and #6 being adjacent to each other is too funny, lol.

The duality of man (humans*), I suppose.



OT: These studies are very promising, and before the "who is the study funded by" people, ofc insurance companies are self-interested to know the safety of models of cars so they can make money with the policies. My understanding is that back when I started college, the technology was already there with Kalman filters and various location mapping algorithms aideds by lidars, sensors etc., but seemingly it has exploded very recently, which I'd think is the result of a lot of training for the most part than algorithmic improvements.

Honestly, I'm pumped by this because I don't actually like driving, I prefer reading something and not having to pay attention to the road.
Oct 5, 5:42 AM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
Auron said:
Posts #5 and #6 being adjacent to each other is too funny, lol.

That's intentional, haha.

@JaniSIr

Considering we already widely use subscription model for car "ownership", I don't see a big problem to make the last step forward and abolish "ownership" in sake of subscription for a self-driving cab (not necessarily shared, it may be kinda private lease + service fee etc). You just tap the button on your phone and ride. No burdens - all charging, cleaning, service and storage is done by the service provider.

You keep your autonomy and privacy (what you actually need own car for), for the rest there is mastercard. Wanna turn your music loud and do something funny on the backseat - fine, the robot doesn't care. Better than "bus" and "train" altogether.
LoveYourSmileOct 5, 5:56 AM
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 5, 5:43 AM
Community Mod
TYRANT

Offline
Jan 2009
728
Nuh-uh, not for me. A ghost driving the car is too scary!

LoveYourSmile said:
I'm more than happy for it to be Tesla, because it's nearly a perfect car already.

Oh no, not this. I live in a city infested with them and their ridiculous noises! I spent the last 15m trying to find a silly clip I saw about it a couple years ago but the coward deleted it. Now you know how to (lightly) torture me.

Auron said:
Honestly, I'm pumped by this because I don't actually like driving, I prefer reading something and not having to pay attention to the road.

I'll drive for you~

Especially because I can't read in a car, I can't even look at my phone. I get motion sickness in about 10 seconds, it's horrible.




Another hero? Oh, please!
You're a god-damn philistine.
Oct 5, 5:50 AM
resident arbiter

Offline
Oct 2015
6816
LoveYourSmile said:
@JaniSIr Considering we already widely use subscription model for car "ownership", I don't see a big problem to make the last step forward and abolish "ownership" in sake of subscription for a self-driving cab. You just tap the button on your phone and ride. No burdens - all charging, cleaning, service and storage is done by the service provider. You keep you autonomy and privacy (what you actually need own car for), for the rest there is mastercard. Wanna turn your music loud and do something funny the backseat - fine, the robot doesn't care. Better than "bus" and "train" altogether.


>Inb4 the response "You vill own nothing und be happy, eat ze bugs" appears.

I don't think you need to "abolish" ownership, lol. Just let people have freedom of association/commerce and the more convenient option for a particular person will rise to the occasion, whether it is self-driving or manual.

CC said:
I'll drive for you~

Especially because I can't read in a car, I can't even look at my phone. I get motion sickness in about 10 seconds, it's horrible.


Oh my, you're so kind as always :')

That's unfortunate though! How about there is a self-driving car, and we both listen to an audiobook, that should go fine! if i pick it i might bore you to sleep D:

nvm, you mentioned ghost car, fair!
AuronOct 5, 7:52 AM
Oct 5, 5:51 AM

Offline
May 2018
1386
Reply to JaniSIr
@Nysse That's just a bus. And the dedicated track is important, that's what makes trains fast, while buses tend to just get stuck in traffic in USA.
@JaniSIr okay I don't know about the US but here buses are not stuck in traffic. Maybe the traffic would go smoother there if more people used the bus instead of having a car of their own?

And also apparently some of your trains are slow af for long distance. Which is bonkers to me as the distances in the US are pretty big. But ye trains are goat even though the rails are a bit much for infrastructure inside a smaller city for example
Oct 5, 6:13 AM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
CC said:
Oh no, not this. I live in a city infested with them and their ridiculous noises! I spent the last 15m trying to find a silly clip I saw about it a couple years ago but the coward deleted it. Now you know how to (lightly) torture me.

Oh, don't torment yourself over nothing. You mean the whistling, right? Fine - once I launch my robotaxi corp, I promise there will only be eqs driving around your area, they don't whistle.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 5, 6:47 AM

Offline
Jul 2015
14392
On one hand, I've been able to drive every day for 15 years without having a single accident

On the other hand, my license has been revoked because I smoke weed.

I feel like just paying attention to the road, and not being penalized for pointless shit is the easy answer, but if you wanna sped a fortune to make self-driving cars so you don't have to learn to drive anymore, I guess that's a thing? Can't wait for my govt to make it illegal to drive so we're all forced to buy 200K€ self-driving electric trashpies.
Prophetess of the Golden Era
Oct 5, 8:48 AM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to LoveYourSmile
Auron said:
Posts #5 and #6 being adjacent to each other is too funny, lol.

That's intentional, haha.

@JaniSIr

Considering we already widely use subscription model for car "ownership", I don't see a big problem to make the last step forward and abolish "ownership" in sake of subscription for a self-driving cab (not necessarily shared, it may be kinda private lease + service fee etc). You just tap the button on your phone and ride. No burdens - all charging, cleaning, service and storage is done by the service provider.

You keep your autonomy and privacy (what you actually need own car for), for the rest there is mastercard. Wanna turn your music loud and do something funny on the backseat - fine, the robot doesn't care. Better than "bus" and "train" altogether.
@LoveYourSmile We really should go back from subscription models to actually owning what to buy, it's getting really dystopian.
We do have bike rentals like that , but individual cars are too expensive and big, and wouldn't actually reduce the traffic in cities. Also bikes have an advantage where people who'd run down a car are also too lazy to bike.
Oct 5, 9:20 AM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to Nysse
@JaniSIr okay I don't know about the US but here buses are not stuck in traffic. Maybe the traffic would go smoother there if more people used the bus instead of having a car of their own?

And also apparently some of your trains are slow af for long distance. Which is bonkers to me as the distances in the US are pretty big. But ye trains are goat even though the rails are a bit much for infrastructure inside a smaller city for example
@Nysse The US in particular is the extreme example of a poorly funded public transportation system in cities that are designed exclusively for cars...
If the cities were pedestrian first then most of those traffic issues just wouldn't exist to need some high tech solution to solve.

China has trains that go 350km/h+. Getting through an airport takes so long, that it'd be faster to go by train maybe with the exception of cross country travel.
Oct 5, 10:01 AM
lagom
Offline
Jan 2009
107502
few horrible accidents on the news and people will be conditioned to hate them just like how the news media portrayed nuclear energy as something dangerous when stats shows its not and same reason why people are more afraid of airplanes than driving cars when stats shows again airplanes are safer its just negativity bias at work
Oct 5, 10:11 AM

Online
Sep 2016
22031
Reply to deg
few horrible accidents on the news and people will be conditioned to hate them just like how the news media portrayed nuclear energy as something dangerous when stats shows its not and same reason why people are more afraid of airplanes than driving cars when stats shows again airplanes are safer its just negativity bias at work
@deg History has shown that increased convenience usually wins.
*kappa*
Oct 5, 11:10 AM

Offline
Dec 2015
592
Anything to keep awful drivers off the road.
Oct 5, 2:07 PM

Offline
May 2019
2507
JaniSIr said:
Actually driving a car is easier and safer for humans than trying to supervise an automated system.
They should just build more trains instead...

Waymos aren't human supervised. It's a taxi type service. So yeah, people taking Waymos are goofing off doing whatever they want. Yet so far, data indicates they are safe.

I would support more and better transit. However, public transit has some fundamental limitations that cars will always have an advantage in for most circumstances. Imagine if you could only start your car at a specific minute on a schedule. Now imagine the schedule isn't even accurate and the time you can actually start your car can be 5 to 10 minutes off. Now imagine the car is parked some number of blocks away and it will have to be some blocks away from your destination. Now imagine you can only drive through specific routes. I could go on more. A good exercise to try out: Take any city you think has good transit and check on Google Maps whether some normal trip takes more or less time. In most cases the car is estimated to take less time.

That said, bullet trains are neat. And people shouldn't need a car to get around most places in their city. That I can agree with.

I also think @LoveYourSmile makes some good points about privacy.
Nysse said:
Maybe the traffic would go smoother there if more people used the bus instead of having a car of their own?

Buses do take up a lot less space per person.

That said, you'll run into this problem with us Americans:

There's a good economic solution to this though that Singapore, London and now New York are doing: congestion pricing. Drivers get to have better traffic and public transit gets increased ridership.
deg said:
few horrible accidents on the news and people will be conditioned to hate them just like how the news media portrayed nuclear energy as something dangerous when stats shows its not and same reason why people are more afraid of airplanes than driving cars when stats shows again airplanes are safer its just negativity bias at work

This is a major concern for me as well! I think you put your point beautifully.
StarlaFox said:
Anything to keep awful drivers off the road.

I think we should be much more strict with DUIs if they become widely available. After all, we would no longer have to worry that someone can't get around as quickly.
FreshellOct 5, 2:15 PM
Oct 5, 2:42 PM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
Freshell said:
I also think @LoveYourSmile makes some good points about privacy.

For me personally, it's no-brainer that cars win over classic public transit, for many reasons.

What I find appealing in the concept of self-driving cars is that it can actually merge both concepts into one: just a smooth organized flow of many autonomous small vehicles that are 100% aware of each other, follow rules, park nicely etc. It's like with automatic traffic lights: the thing just works and you don't question it.

And that's exactly why I mentioned "abolishing of car ownership" as a step further - to eliminate anomalies that may ruin that order.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 5, 2:47 PM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to Freshell
JaniSIr said:
Actually driving a car is easier and safer for humans than trying to supervise an automated system.
They should just build more trains instead...

Waymos aren't human supervised. It's a taxi type service. So yeah, people taking Waymos are goofing off doing whatever they want. Yet so far, data indicates they are safe.

I would support more and better transit. However, public transit has some fundamental limitations that cars will always have an advantage in for most circumstances. Imagine if you could only start your car at a specific minute on a schedule. Now imagine the schedule isn't even accurate and the time you can actually start your car can be 5 to 10 minutes off. Now imagine the car is parked some number of blocks away and it will have to be some blocks away from your destination. Now imagine you can only drive through specific routes. I could go on more. A good exercise to try out: Take any city you think has good transit and check on Google Maps whether some normal trip takes more or less time. In most cases the car is estimated to take less time.

That said, bullet trains are neat. And people shouldn't need a car to get around most places in their city. That I can agree with.

I also think @LoveYourSmile makes some good points about privacy.
Nysse said:
Maybe the traffic would go smoother there if more people used the bus instead of having a car of their own?

Buses do take up a lot less space per person.

That said, you'll run into this problem with us Americans:

There's a good economic solution to this though that Singapore, London and now New York are doing: congestion pricing. Drivers get to have better traffic and public transit gets increased ridership.
deg said:
few horrible accidents on the news and people will be conditioned to hate them just like how the news media portrayed nuclear energy as something dangerous when stats shows its not and same reason why people are more afraid of airplanes than driving cars when stats shows again airplanes are safer its just negativity bias at work

This is a major concern for me as well! I think you put your point beautifully.
StarlaFox said:
Anything to keep awful drivers off the road.

I think we should be much more strict with DUIs if they become widely available. After all, we would no longer have to worry that someone can't get around as quickly.
@Freshell Waymos are tested in the most favourable conditions I presume to fudge the statistics...
On busy lines you never need to look at the timetable. It's perfectly reasonable to have a tram or metro scheduled every 2-5 minutes.
Cars are faster if the roads are empty, and slower if they are full. As you pointed out, the worst enemy of driver is other drivers.
Also public transport shouldn't be for the poor, make it higher quality. Why would anyone drive, when they could do anything else on a potentially faster train?
Oct 5, 2:51 PM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to LoveYourSmile
Freshell said:
I also think @LoveYourSmile makes some good points about privacy.

For me personally, it's no-brainer that cars win over classic public transit, for many reasons.

What I find appealing in the concept of self-driving cars is that it can actually merge both concepts into one: just a smooth organized flow of many autonomous small vehicles that are 100% aware of each other, follow rules, park nicely etc. It's like with automatic traffic lights: the thing just works and you don't question it.

And that's exactly why I mentioned "abolishing of car ownership" as a step further - to eliminate anomalies that may ruin that order.
@LoveYourSmile Walking. The pinnacle of city transportation is walking.
Reserving the city space where humans are supposed to be for high speed autonomous cars is some techno dystopian nightmare.
And car traffic is loud too...
Oct 5, 4:18 PM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
@JaniSIr Oh, it's so kind of you to remind me of walking...


...but let's be real: this way I can't even walk to the nearby mountain on a sunny day. 50km is 50km, haha.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 5, 5:20 PM

Offline
May 2019
2507
JaniSIr said:
Waymos are tested in the most favourable conditions I presume to fudge the statistics...

Waymos are a fully functioning service. I drive among them all the time in my city. They're driving in the same bustling streets I am and are also available during rain or fog. The roll out has not gone nation wide yet, so perhaps they are currently better trained for the cities they've been deployed in. But nonetheless the technology will only get better. If it's been well adapted to some cities, I'm sure it will be able to used nationwide then globally at some point with similar safety data around it.
JaniSIr said:
On busy lines you never need to look at the timetable. It's perfectly reasonable to have a tram or metro scheduled every 2-5 minutes

That still leaves a lot of everyday uses where cars will be faster. Say for commutes that are only a 20 minute drive. My point has been that many typical trips are faster by car.
JaniSIr said:
Cars are faster if the roads are empty, and slower if they are full. As you pointed out, the worst enemy of driver is other drivers.
Also public transport shouldn't be for the poor, make it higher quality. Why would anyone drive, when they could do anything else on a potentially faster train?

True. That's why I support congestion pricing. :p
There's many appeals to public transit. But there's also many appeals to private car use. So let people decide which to use, I say. While improving public transit, of course. But still, many people will want to use cars.
Oct 5, 5:41 PM

Offline
Jul 2021
10738
Reply to Freshell
JaniSIr said:
Waymos are tested in the most favourable conditions I presume to fudge the statistics...

Waymos are a fully functioning service. I drive among them all the time in my city. They're driving in the same bustling streets I am and are also available during rain or fog. The roll out has not gone nation wide yet, so perhaps they are currently better trained for the cities they've been deployed in. But nonetheless the technology will only get better. If it's been well adapted to some cities, I'm sure it will be able to used nationwide then globally at some point with similar safety data around it.
JaniSIr said:
On busy lines you never need to look at the timetable. It's perfectly reasonable to have a tram or metro scheduled every 2-5 minutes

That still leaves a lot of everyday uses where cars will be faster. Say for commutes that are only a 20 minute drive. My point has been that many typical trips are faster by car.
JaniSIr said:
Cars are faster if the roads are empty, and slower if they are full. As you pointed out, the worst enemy of driver is other drivers.
Also public transport shouldn't be for the poor, make it higher quality. Why would anyone drive, when they could do anything else on a potentially faster train?

True. That's why I support congestion pricing. :p
There's many appeals to public transit. But there's also many appeals to private car use. So let people decide which to use, I say. While improving public transit, of course. But still, many people will want to use cars.
@Freshell It's really insane that ever became legal even for testing...
I don't want to ban cars entirely, but cities with less car traffic are more livable.
Oct 5, 5:57 PM

Offline
May 2019
2507
JaniSIr said:
It's really insane that ever became legal even for testing...

I assume there was a gradual process here. I noticed the Waymo cars driving around not long after there were reports of autonomous cars performing very well in laboratory conditions.
JaniSIr said:
I don't want to ban cars entirely, but cities with less car traffic are more livable

I don't really have an anti car mindset, but I do wind supporting things that would wind up with there being more dense, walkable cities anyway. Namely, increasing the housing supply as a solution to have cheaper housing and allowing more mixed uses. I think framing things as "people should be able to be able to walk to get most necessities" or "having a car shouldn't be practically mandatory" are more fruitful than downplaying the benefits of cars.
Oct 6, 9:29 PM

Offline
Aug 2025
141
Reply to CC
Nuh-uh, not for me. A ghost driving the car is too scary!

LoveYourSmile said:
I'm more than happy for it to be Tesla, because it's nearly a perfect car already.

Oh no, not this. I live in a city infested with them and their ridiculous noises! I spent the last 15m trying to find a silly clip I saw about it a couple years ago but the coward deleted it. Now you know how to (lightly) torture me.

Auron said:
Honestly, I'm pumped by this because I don't actually like driving, I prefer reading something and not having to pay attention to the road.

I'll drive for you~

Especially because I can't read in a car, I can't even look at my phone. I get motion sickness in about 10 seconds, it's horrible.
CC said:
Nuh-uh, not for me. A ghost driving the car is too scary!


I will be your chauffeur dearest CC-nee.



"Have we not eaten while another starved? Will you punish us for that? Will you reward us for the virtue of starving while others ate? No man earns punishment, no man earns reward. Free your mind of the idea of deserving, the idea of earning, and you will begin to be able to think.”
Oct 6, 10:47 PM

Offline
Aug 2024
215
I would like to be as happy as OP because SD cars being safer may genuinely be a great thing that can help saves thousands of people from death or injury in car accidents and make our lives better off. It has value and I can respect that.

But then...
LoveYourSmile said:

Considering we already widely use subscription model for car "ownership", I don't see a big problem to make the last step forward and abolish "ownership" in sake of subscription for a self-driving cab (not necessarily shared, it may be kinda private lease + service fee etc). You just tap the button on your phone and ride. No burdens - all charging, cleaning, service and storage is done by the service provider.

You keep your autonomy and privacy (what you actually need own car for), for the rest there is mastercard. Wanna turn your music loud and do something funny on the backseat - fine, the robot doesn't care. Better than "bus" and "train" altogether.

LoveYourSmile said:
And that's exactly why I mentioned "abolishing of car ownership" as a step further - to eliminate anomalies that may ruin that order.

I find it hard to be optimistic about tech because every single time, without fail, people start pushing it too far.
I really hope you're not be serious here. If you are, put down your Ricardo model before you doom us all.

Also the robots do care because their owners care. Big data is big business. I guess you could argue that we already are being spied on so it doesn't matter, but I don't feel accelerating the process is a wise policy.



Baskarite said:
I'd probably kill myself if fucking kyun kyun came on over the speaker while I was trying to fight.
Oct 6, 11:13 PM

Offline
Mar 2008
53425
Autonomous vehicles mainly run in major cities with traffic that is at a crawl so they are not very good examples of faster but crowded situations as well as more sporadic animal and pedestrian crossing you would get in places where there is no designated crosswalks. We already had for centuries the ability to travel without being an active driver, it's called public transportation and carpooling.
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
Oct 6, 11:27 PM

Offline
Aug 2014
4982
I don't care how safe anyone says autonomous vehicles are. It's not safe if it chooses to kill me, its passenger, while prioritizing other factors such as avoiding an alternate collision. (And yes, this has already happened.) Utilitarianism is suicide.

It is a documented fact that the government (and hackers) can already remotely override the controls of newer cars, potentially sending a targeted person off a cliff and so on. I don't need even more ways for my car to kill me by giving up the ability to drive the damn thing.

As for public transport...any benefits are ruined by the fact that strangers can attack you when you're on a bus, train, etc. (Not to mention the loss of freedom of movement.)

I value my freedom, safety and dignity, thus I shall avoid any of these collectivist-oriented means of transportation, opting to control my own destiny with traditional private vehicles.
Oct 7, 1:29 AM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
User8492 said:
I really hope you're not be serious here.

Look, it's really quite simple - it's a choice between two evils. I'm not afraid of a technological dystopia, because I trust my government to regulate it with at least some common sense. What I trust far less are the drugged-up teenagers in ShareNow cars swerving into oncoming traffic, or the bearded guys with alien cultural values whose driving licenses, for some reason, we still recognize here.

I'm a good driver, and honestly, I love driving. But I'm consciously willing to give up that precious privilege for the peace of mind of not worrying when my daughter jumps into some random taxi at night.

That's my choice, because I know that all real danger on the road comes from idiots. And in that sense, a robot secretly watching me grope someone or snort coke in the back seat is a secondary concern - let it watch, I don't care. All it takes is once - just once - to see a blinding pair of headlights appear in your lane out of nowhere to understand what you should truly be afraid of.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 7, 6:46 AM
Community Mod
TYRANT

Offline
Jan 2009
728
I love the idea of safe, clean, effective public transit but implementation of that is a whole other issue. I used to love the trains in my city, but now with an abrupt and massive population increase, I don't interact with them at all and I find it quite sad. Development is also stagnant, but that's a whole other subject regarding bureaucracy and privatization. Many societies are becoming more low trust by the day, and that too is a problem with how it affects views on public transit. It's just difficult to discuss the state of public transit in a lot of the world without getting into the politics — social & otherwise — surrounding it.

I do wish bullet trains for travel were more common, though.

LoveYourSmile said:
Fine - once I launch my robotaxi corp, I promise there will only be eqs driving around your area, they don't whistle.

My hero! But I'd have thought you'd advocate for BMW, they even have a Hans Zimmer upgrade for the interior sounds; it sounds so nice for an EV (in Sports mode) even if the concept itself is a little silly.

Auron said:
if i pick it i might bore you to sleep D:

Oh no, imagine if I got extra sleep... How terrible. Jokes aside, I'm sure whatever you picked would be fine, especially since we can then discuss it in real time! I suppose being able to have private conversation in a quiet place is an upside vs. even the nicest public transit.

Auron said:
nvm, you mentioned ghost car, fair!

Obviously, I just like being in control. I'm not going to relinquish it to some ghost in the machine, hmph. Topically, have you ever read Demon Seed (1997) by Dean Koontz? Not your usual kind of thing, but I think about it sometimes with the sorts of discussions we're having in modern society! If you haven't and care at all, be careful about looking it up on Wikipedia because it spoils things immediately.


I'll stop myself from writing a blogpost about it in the self driving car thread your friend so lovingly handcrafted, but I had to ask!




Another hero? Oh, please!
You're a god-damn philistine.
Oct 7, 8:02 AM

Offline
Aug 2024
215
Reply to LoveYourSmile
User8492 said:
I really hope you're not be serious here.

Look, it's really quite simple - it's a choice between two evils. I'm not afraid of a technological dystopia, because I trust my government to regulate it with at least some common sense. What I trust far less are the drugged-up teenagers in ShareNow cars swerving into oncoming traffic, or the bearded guys with alien cultural values whose driving licenses, for some reason, we still recognize here.

I'm a good driver, and honestly, I love driving. But I'm consciously willing to give up that precious privilege for the peace of mind of not worrying when my daughter jumps into some random taxi at night.

That's my choice, because I know that all real danger on the road comes from idiots. And in that sense, a robot secretly watching me grope someone or snort coke in the back seat is a secondary concern - let it watch, I don't care. All it takes is once - just once - to see a blinding pair of headlights appear in your lane out of nowhere to understand what you should truly be afraid of.
@LoveYourSmile
This is going to be a bit America-centric, so if you're not American then disregard some of the points.

Fair enough. Maybe I don't grasp it on a subconscious level as much as you, but I understand how big motor vehicle accidents are in causing death. Around 41,000 Americans died from motor accidents in 2024. Both my mother and my sister have been in car accidents in the last few years that were not their fault, the former hit by a drunk driver and the latter by an elderly woman. Especially in the first case, it is not hard for me to imagine many of my family members being dead because of motor accidents.

That said, there are plenty of other options that, unlike SD cars, have substantial evidence to help decrease traffic deaths. Lower speed limits, narrower roads, judicious use of speed bumps and marking, decreasing size and scope of vehicles manufactured, etc. Then there is the constant issue of "why not promote public transit?" The issue is that, as you exemplify, there tends to be this knee-jerk jump to creating super expensive and dystopian tech solutions to fix problems that may otherwise be fixed by more effective government creation. Hell, even a nation-wide prohibition on alcohol would be better than your solution. There are so many things we can do before we start destroying people's security.

And that is my largest concern, economic security, not privacy. Some 70% of American workers drive alone to work as of 2024 1. That is 70% of American workers who would lose ownership of their vehicles. That is 70% of American workers without the stability and certainty of ownership. That is 70% of American workers who are more bound by the whims of a new class of car-lords sucking them dry. And, unlike you, I do not trust that the government would regulate it with common sense. The automobile is one of the most important pieces of property an American will ever own. Sure, many can get away with renting, but I'm less concerned with those few and more concerned with the majority. The amount of blood that has been spilled over the subject of ownership is so immense that I do not think it wise to take it lightly.

There are many other points that can be made such as on the dangers of privacy loss, damage liability, or on the expenses of car repairs but I do not intend to discuss this further.

Like I said in my original post, I am not opposed to SD cars. On the contrary, if the studies show they are safer, then by all means, promote them. However, to jump to depriving millions of workers of the stability and security of ownership and installing new tech overlords to destroy the car market seems to me like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.



User8492Oct 7, 8:17 AM
Baskarite said:
I'd probably kill myself if fucking kyun kyun came on over the speaker while I was trying to fight.
Oct 7, 8:04 AM
resident arbiter

Offline
Oct 2015
6816
@CC The lowering of social trust is a trend that I also observe and it is dismaying. The more upsetting part of it is that it can often be a self-fulfilling prophecy, like how in many countries, homicide rates have been going down at a time where perceptions of crime were going up. It's something I don't know how it'd be untangled

CC said:
Oh no, imagine if I got extra sleep... How terrible.


It did occur to me later yeah I know... 😓 A blessing in disguise haha, though the alternative sounds awesome too but I shall let you rest!

CC said:

Obviously, I just like being in control.


Don't I know it haha. That's very CC-esque indeed and that ghost got nothing on you!

I haven't read it unfortunately, but the name seems vaguely familiar 🙂 I think given the nature of AGI/ASI concerns and me having some nontrivial credence to its plausibility, it seems very befitting to read this! It also sort of reminded me of I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream, which was truly horrifying both the short story and the game. I'm a fast reader, so maybe we can blog after all haha (of course when things are more convenient for you, I also am curious about your opinion on that other book you mentioned elsewhere too since that's a figure I'm quite familiar with)


Edit: I ended up reading it in one go, the story was quite horrifying! The currently feared AI doom scenarios are usually not in the direction of AI attaining sentience and yearning for flesh/companionship but older conceptualizations are also quite interesting! It also gives me insight on how AI was framed in people's minds as it sticks to rules like be truthful to humans, whereas AI researchers would say as per instrumental convergence, most AIs would not have a be truthful principle, but rather generally resource acquisition and prevent modification/shutdown
AuronOct 8, 1:08 PM
Oct 7, 8:58 AM

Offline
Mar 2008
53425
I suggest checking this out. Not only do self driving cars have to drive but they have to calculate risks and morals.
http://moralmachine.mit.edu/


SmugSatoko said:
I don't care how safe anyone says autonomous vehicles are. It's not safe if it chooses to kill me, its passenger, while prioritizing other factors such as avoiding an alternate collision. (And yes, this has already happened.) Utilitarianism is suicide.

It is a documented fact that the government (and hackers) can already remotely override the controls of newer cars, potentially sending a targeted person off a cliff and so on. I don't need even more ways for my car to kill me by giving up the ability to drive the damn thing.

As for public transport...any benefits are ruined by the fact that strangers can attack you when you're on a bus, train, etc. (Not to mention the loss of freedom of movement.)

I value my freedom, safety and dignity, thus I shall avoid any of these collectivist-oriented means of transportation, opting to control my own destiny with traditional private vehicles.

That can potentially be an issue that a car may have morals conflicting with the passenger thus they may be avoidant of using it for that reason which kind of defeats the purpose in a way.

While true cars can be hacked, you are somewhat assuming only a scenario a single vehicle is targeted not every one of a specific model or region because it will depend not on the target but available vulnerabilities to utilize and whether or not collateral damage is accepted. It also would be assuming someone of such high status would be using public transport to begin with. Unfortunately it is increasingly getting harder to get ahold of older cars without such features that run well still and are street legal. Hacking issue of cars can be reduced risk by not having everything on one single computer system but separate ones for different tasks in the car and not use bluetooth which is known to be a vulnerable protocol and there may be a few other mitigations I am not thinking of aside from the obvious of just disabling certain chips like what connects to the internet.

Road rage and carjacking though. They can run you off the road or shoot you which either can hit you or cause you to crash unless you happen to be driving a bulletproof car. There also are people who throw rocks and other things at cars. You can in theory evade in a car but unless you are trained in evasive maneuvers that will be risky in itself in some cases and you can also in theory evade in public transport. Either way your movement is still limited by surroundings. It would be difficult to compare actual danger levels of one vs the other.

Public transport would not entirely replace driving though because there always will be cases of not being able to meet every path and time. It clears up the roads making them less congested thus safer and shorter travel times and more room to enjoy driving and cleaner air to breathe as well as slightly lower summer temperatures. Also cycling has similar effect and that is individuals not groups of people so building infrastructure for cycling away from the road is also mutually beneficial for drivers and cyclists alike as well as pedestrians, for reducing congestion and removing cyclists from sharing the road and sidewalks. So if you like to drive you should be in favor of public transport regardless of if you were to use it or not as it is mutually beneficial for everyone. This gets enhanced even more when you consider how much better this is for emergency vehicles to get on site of event and to hospital faster. And what happens if your car breaks down, you have somewhere to go but no available friend? Using a ride share you would be just jumping in a car with a stranger anyway and it costs more than public transport unless you hitch hike which cant be reliable.
traedOct 7, 10:44 AM
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
Oct 7, 9:02 PM
🌷Weiß Engel🐇

Online
Feb 2024
1159
CC said:
But I'd have thought you'd advocate for BMW, they even have a Hans Zimmer upgrade for the interior sounds; it sounds so nice for an EV (in Sports mode) even if the concept itself is a little silly.

Yeah, yeah, I drove the ix m60 a little - it's really fun, you almost forget you are in ev, and in sport mode it really presses you into the seat, haha. But honestly, I wish it had better brakes - for that kind of weight and acceleration, they felt a coinflip to me.

Not sure about the sounds, mixed feelings: I actually liked the ambient noises (like the little button sounds etc) more than the main acceleration soundtracks it's famous for, no idea why.

And don't even ask me why mbg and not bmw - I may start barking and biting women and children out of the blue, haha.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Oct 8, 12:59 AM

Offline
Jan 2020
931
That’s nice but I’d like to see how they perform in rural areas and, you know, in places that are barely accessible through Google Street View. And since I’m not that informed on the topic, I’d also like to know whether the autopilot requires a stable internet connection. If it does, then we might have a problem…
Yesterday, 6:08 PM

Offline
May 2019
2507
SmugSatoko said:
I don't care how safe anyone says autonomous vehicles are. It's not safe if it chooses to kill me, its passenger, while prioritizing other factors such as avoiding an alternate collision. (And yes, this has already happened.) Utilitarianism is suicide.

It is a documented fact that the government (and hackers) can already remotely override the controls of newer cars, potentially sending a targeted person off a cliff and so on. I don't need even more ways for my car to kill me by giving up the ability to drive the damn thing.

As for public transport...any benefits are ruined by the fact that strangers can attack you when you're on a bus, train, etc. (Not to mention the loss of freedom of movement.)

I value my freedom, safety and dignity, thus I shall avoid any of these collectivist-oriented means of transportation, opting to control my own destiny with traditional private vehicles.

If someone values freedom and wanting to control the steeling wheel themselves, then by all means, have at it! This isn't a thread about banning any means of transportation after all.

That said, I see many prudent reasons to favor self driving cars based on safety, and the prudent reasons will increase over time. If mode of transportation A is 10 times likely to kill you than mode of transportation B, then that's a prudent reason to favor mode of transportation B, all else equal. Of course, people can have other factors they care about.

The following scenario will become more commonplace in the future: if you need a rideshare service, will you prefer the Uber driver who has a worse collision track record, or the self driving car that has a much better collision track record? I would favor using the track record.

Also, Waymos have only been involved in one fatal accident after 100 million miles of transportation.

A self-driving Waymo car, which is not being blamed for the crash, was among six vehicles struck when a fast-moving vehicle slammed into a line of car stopped at a traffic light at the corner of 6th and Harrison Streets, about a mile south of the city’s famed Union Square.

Seems like the more self interested human driven cars weren't any better at avoiding the crash in this case!
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/waymo-multi-car-wreck-san-francisco-driverless/3766860/
User8492 said:
Lower speed limits, narrower roads, judicious use of speed bumps and marking, decreasing size and scope of vehicles manufactured, etc. Then there is the constant issue of "why not promote public transit?" The issue is that, as you exemplify, there tends to be this knee-jerk jump to creating super expensive and dystopian tech solutions to fix problems that may otherwise be fixed by more effective government creation. Hell, even a nation-wide prohibition on alcohol would be better than your solution. There are so many things we can do before we start destroying people's security.

I know I'm not involved in this interesting back and forth, but I am one of the few people who consistently favor policies that would lower car collision deaths. :p E.g. my traffic cam thread. I also favor narrower lanes and shorter blocks.

That said, I think the reason why these are rarely implemented is simple: drivers get annoyed by having to drive more slowly, and they are annoyed when driving laws are more effectively enforced. Something like SDs sound like a good way to marry self interest with public safety, meanwhile!

For the record, I don't want mandatory SDs. I'm in favor of letting insurance companies figure out what kinds of cars increase how much they have to pay out and to set rates accordingly. :p
traed said:
I suggest checking this out. Not only do self driving cars have to drive but they have to calculate risks and morals.

I tend to not to worry too much about these kinds of scenarios. It assumes we've gotten into some kind of precarious situation where the machine has to make a moral decision that may deviate from a humans. But the question is whether the machine is going to be way better at avoiding these kinds of situations in the first place! I think they will. Thanks for sharing though.

More topics from this board

» Do the well-known stereotypes associated with people from your country actually apply to you? ( 1 2 )

fleurbleue - Oct 8

78 by Auron »»
2 minutes ago

» china crossdresser are so cute omg!!!

Ymir_The_Viking - 7 hours ago

28 by MalchikRepaid »»
8 minutes ago

» What's your favorite quote?

Zakatsuki_ - Sep 18

25 by Soullessss »»
11 minutes ago

» are there any "Hikikomori" here like me? ( 1 2 )

Ymir_The_Viking - Oct 11

66 by _Mazino »»
31 minutes ago

» All of you who learned English as a 2nd language, is your accent clear or thick?

fleurbleue - Yesterday

40 by -Shinzo »»
46 minutes ago
It’s time to ditch the text file.
Keep track of your anime easily by creating your own list.
Sign Up Login