While self-driving is obviously a challenging problem, I am still bemused by people who think "it will never happen".
An auto exec who believes that, is unfit for the job and definitely unfit for the future of that job.
There we go...most of the skepticism about self-driving cars appears to be driven by ideology and less by the actual evidence. "Mainstream opinions"...it is not an opinion, there are literally thousands of these cars being tested/piloted and improved upon constantly.
Might it take a little longer to get to nirvana? probably, but it borders on delusion at this point for anyone to say it will never happen.
You can't provide evidence of something that hasn't happened, and level 5 autonomous vehicles haven't happened. All you can provide is evidence of things we have already achieved, and use that to support a strong opinion that we will be able to achieve more things.
Anyways, back to my original point, firing someone for having an informed counter-mainstream opinion is the sign of a weak and petty leader.
It's very easy for execs to talk up utopian smack, it's harder the other way around.
I for one agree: L5 may not be viable for many decades at least, not with the tech we have. It may never happen because conditions will change to the point wherein it won't make sense.
What is viable, that nobody really talks about are 'controlled areas' - for example, highways built for long-haul trucks with 0 human drivers. This is a great place for AI because the conditions are set for all the crazy unknowns (esp. humans) to be controlled.
Special roadways within cities, where there are no pedestrians, AI drivers only, that can communicate with 'the grid' etc - could not only mean full L5 'driverless' but no stop-signs either - traffic could be designed to flow much, much more efficiently using 'today's tech'. Cars won't have steering wheels, they can be called 'on demand' and 'parking' will be very different, more like 'temp storage' and won't involve humans. All viable.
This is a point that always seems to be missing. All of our roads are/were constructed at a specific size with specific engineering requirements and specific materials. If we have a major change in the technology of the cars, it seems to be perfectly reasonable that we could have a new type of road to accommodate that. For example, before interstate highways it probably would have sounded strange to imagine high-speed roads with limited entry and exit. And before that, may have sounded strange to have automated stoplights and traffic signals.