And that's valid for now. That a company has not had a major accident so far does not mean that I'm not going to be their first victim.
I love the idea of self driving cars.
But they are also really scary.
They're being brought to us by the same industry that gave us
* BSOD
* "why the heck can't I share my screen right now? can you share your screen? yes? well why can't I share my screen?"
* Your account has been terminated for breaking the terms and conditions. You cannot appeal this decision. We are now deleting 4TB of your life's work.
* An attacker has gained access to your email account. Your life is now ruined.
`But they're safer than human drivers!`
So what. They're new, they're capable of killing you, they're brought to you by tech.
They're f'n scary.
Self-driving advocates will do well to acknowledge this rather than being dismissive.
Uber's murder car was not autonomous. It was not capable of ever operating without a "safety driver". Therefore it was not an autonomous vehicle. Nor is any Tesla.
Waymo has operated cars with zero humans aboard at various points going back quite a few years. They are legitimate autonomous vehicles.
Dangerous human drivers are likely to be consistently erratic (e.g., drunk), or distracted and oblivious in certain situations (bikes, intersections, lane changes).
For all we know, an AI driver might drive perfectly for three hours, and then accelerate full speed onto the sidewalk.
I think the risk of a malfunction is much higher with a robot than a sober human, and probably most legally intoxicated humans.
I don't base it on Hollywood, but in years of programming experience. Anyway, did you hear about the 737 that crashed due to a software bug last month?
What is that based on? Do you mean the proportions of AI and human drivers?
Thank you for a textbook example of begging the question.