Technically, autonomous cars have one death/3m miles, as opposed to one death/100m miles for human-driven cars, but it has a lot to do with the fact that autonomous cars travelled a lot less.
Exactly. There was a tesla crash several weeks ago where the car was on autopilot and it crashed into an unexpected obstacle on the freeway. The black box info clearly showed that the driver was ignoring teslas warnings to pay full attention to the road, and he was not properly performing his duties as the driver of the car. And yet, the media and the drivers family tried to pin the fault on Tesla.
Maybe because their site advertises their advanced crash prevention system as a "self-driving system that is potentially two times better than any human driver"?
Yes, but tesla does not claim that there system is perfect, and still strongly expresses the importance of staying alert behind the wheel, which is the law anyway. The driver of the car failed to do this. Also, i would like to point out the significance of the word "potentially".
The reason is if They made this, even will buy them cause no license driving needed Also the day all of those car bug nobody will know how to drive it And last but not least We will lost that driving feeling
If autonomous driving can even just reduce fatalities by a small margin, it's worth it. That doesn't mean I'd like to give up the helm of my car, I like driving. But I can also see the reasoning behind this.
I hate autonomous cars because everyone thinks they will solve all of our issues with people crashing. I think better driving schools and making it impossible to use a phone while driving would be a much better alternative.
Nobody is claiming that it will be a perfect solution, but if it is capable of reducing the amount of crashes, then isn't it worth it?
They have a full self driving system in the works. I agree with people thinking that autopilot is that. It's not.
The problem with self-driving cars, and I've said this over and over again, is that when computers do fail, they tend to fail in very odd ways which are then difficult to track down. The rigid "thought processes" of a computer don't work well when applied to the real world unless the programmers could account for literally everything... and you can bet that somehow, somewhere, there will be a situation the programmers couldn't account for. Remember the people who found they could fool an autonomous car prototype into thinking a stop sign was a speed limit 45 sign with a few alterations that, to the naked eye, might look like simple vandalism or a worn sign. And once one of these unexpected situations occurs, the programmers have to race to figure out what happened and why (can't be easy), then fix it without breaking something else, and while all this is going on, you still have thousands of these cars running around with the potentially-fatal mystery problem hiding in their code. As for the hacking, I don't think "a hooded man sitting under the bridge with a laptop" is what you have to worry about. I'd be much more concerned about vindictive coworkers, spouses, etc. and the possibility that the described hacker might be willing to accept payment from these people in exchange for services.
Stricter driving license requirements that focus less on parking and more on driving skills. Some sort of cell phone jammer installed in cars that activates when it is in gear/in motion.
