> So, relative to the confidence most non-technical people seem to have had, this percentage is still not high enough.
My confidence in self driving cars is boosted by my extremely low confidence in people. I know too many drivers who have no business being on the road sober, and other people who routinely drive drunk. I'm confident self driving isn't there yet, i'm also pretty sure that it won't be too long before it gets better than the average driver.
The average driver is pull down by a lot of people who: 1) are drunk 2) speed unnecessarily 3) drive shitty cars 4) drive distracted by tech 5) drive tired
If you eliminate those factors, then major car crashes get reduced to almost nothing.
That is what the autopilot is competing against, not the "average" driver. Until it gets better than a human that is sober, rested and drives defensively, autopilot won't take off. We are a long way from that.
inb4 "everybody thinks that", such inane arguments don't make me drunk.
Even with all the people who drive dangerously, driving is remarkably safe given how many miles we drive. As you say, take away the outliers and it's very safe. And an autonomous system won't gain acceptance among the majority of drivers who don't take these risks until it's conclusively better than them.
It's also the cultural dimension to this: we as humans are very good as establishing a culture or fitting into a new culture when new to it. We are very good at predicting what the other drivers are doing, and we can avoid a lot of incidents that way. When could the AI have a perception of culture change, and say an AI trained in SF would have a hard time adapting in DC or New York - all with different styles of driving. Not to mention moving to other countries...
(you left out Angry, Old)
- 43% of Americans — and 56% of Men — Admit to Drinking and Driving
- 60% of American drivers admit to texting while driving, and 70 percent admit to using a handheld cell phone while driving – 43 percent say they use a mobile device while driving as a habit.
As long as it removes the outliers and drives consistently good enough to avoid accidents, then it is good enough.
But 2 things.
1) average doesn't matter.
There's unlikely to be extremely bad self-driving cars.
2) the road & nature of transportation will adapt to self-driving cars so that they don't need to be as good as they need to be on current roads, and eventually it won't matter (but that's like 20 years in the future).
If you would've looked at cities when the car was invented, you'd have thought that cars would never catch on. Cities adapted to the car. They'll adapt to self-driving. But it's going to take a long time.
Are you kidding? Most of this country can barely keep potholes patched for the benefit of regular cars. Proposing major infrastructure spending to accommodate luxury car features is surely a joke.
And then there is the average driver being distracted -- by cell phone, by alcohol, by passengers in the car, from road rage.
Frankly, the average IQ is 100; self driving should be able to surpass that in reaction time, physics (following distance), and legality; so I think it's likely 75% better than than the average driver. But 100% better than the 50% that are distracted.
There's an old joke that something like 75% of drivers think 75% of everyone else is a bad driver. This is just a demonstration of perception. It only takes one bad driver per lane to really screw up traffic. The correct answer is that the vast majority of drivers are quite competent, but you don't notice them.
https://www.driveresearch.com/market-research-company-blog/c...
https://www.valuepenguin.com/drinking-habits-survey#under-in...
Here are some others https://www.driveresearch.com/market-research-company-blog/c...
Even if the tech grows significantly in capability, the unpredictability of other drivers and the ways snow affects roads seem to me to make these kinds of assists necessary.