In an ideal world, I trust autonomous cars over human-operated cars. So if the conditions are too dire for autonomous cars, I really don't want to be out there with humans driving.
In the U.S. I'm not even sure what such a mechanism would look like? How could you enforce this?
> In an ideal world, I trust autonomous cars over human-operated cars.
I don't understand this mentality out-of-hand, especially because I've been in cars that have had mechanical failures. There is no mechanical system that is perfectly reliable, and I'm not sure we're considering the emergent effects of this properly.
Finally, unless you outright _force_ all drivers to use the autonomous mode, then users can still take control of their cars as they see fit and we're really not improving anything. Case in point, the video says that driving deaths disproportionately affects young _people_. Which is garbage.. it affects young _men_ who are 8 times more likely to die in a vehicle that they're driving than a female of the same age. I don't know how autonomous modes being available are really going to help this group.
I mean, Google has prototypes with no steering wheels, and has as an explicit goal the ability to transport children, blind people, the elderly, etc. Eventually they absolutely do want to force drivers to use autonomous mode (at least "force" in the sense that users will need to opt in when they choose a vehicle or service, rather than minute by minute during a trip).
So all those young men can still do all the things they need a car for, they just don't get to legally operate one until they have demonstrated a higher level of proficiency.
And all the ones that aren't just total assholes can let the car drive when they have been drinking.
You realize that most states already do this, right?
IMO it's a dumb, inefficient drag net because being black and driving 5-over is not a strong predictor of whether or not someone will drunkenly drive off a cliff on their way to prom.
PS: Roads do get closed in the US on a regular basis, generally they have cops direct traffic to other areas or just set up signs.
What this looks like is generally highway patrol blocking off the road and the news of the road closures or advisories is broadcast on the radio and television (and now the Internet, I suppose.)
Even down in sunny Austin Texas we have road closures when heavy rains inundate low-water crossings, though it seems every few years someone tries to make it through one and ends up drowning.
Chains are illegal on Minnesota roadways.
Some entity produces the data that finds roads unfit for driving based on weather and publishes it, local governments consume that data and institute a driving ban, non-essential personnel cannot drive or they'll get a citation.
> I don't understand this mentality out-of-hand, especially because I've been in cars that have had mechanical failures. There is no mechanical system that is perfectly reliable, and I'm not sure we're considering the emergent effects of this properly.
Correct, but I believe that a well-conceived autonomous car has a much higher standard of proper operation than a human, so even if there were mechanical problems, I'd trust the autonomous car to halt operation before the human.
I also don't really understand your last point so sorry for not addressing it.
Unless there was a problem with the halt override.
Are you more likely to get food poisoning from a person prepared meal or a snickers prepared by machines? Now, why assume driving is different?
> Are you more likely to get food poisoning from a person prepared meal or a snickers prepared by machines? Now, why assume driving is different?
Both are so slim who really cares?
Really, you must compare failure rates and severity on both sides. Looking at say aircraft, autopilot cause fewer crashes than pilots and spend vastly more time flying aircraft.
> autopilot cause fewer crashes than pilots
How often do pilots really cause crashes, though? In the sense that it's the pilots fault-more often than not, it isn't. Most crashes are not the result of pilot failure in normal operation-but pilot failure in situations out of their control.
It's hard to blame a pilot when an engine cuts out (a mechanical failure).
my point is not that automated cars are never going to work. But it's just a utopia on here, about how all of our problems will be solved. Computers can't beat physics.
To paraphrase an acquaintance who drives a tow truck:
Basically all deadly crashes are a result of an inability to drive properly (either via distraction or impairment). Actual "people being bad at driving" rarely causes deadly crashes by comparison. People make bad decisions that make them bad at driving.
When a drunk couple goes off a cliff it's always a dude driving. Dumb things involving cell phones are less deadly but skew more female.