From my exp autonomous driving seems entirely plausible within large cities at slower speeds that don't instantly kill you or others, and outside that just as good a lane assist + cruise control as you can get– the rest is branding FSD and walking back a claim or two around it. It all seems very malleable.
So, what speed would that be that is safe for pedestrians?
And how useful is FSD that only drives at that speed?
See where this is going?
As for instantaneous death, a collision between a person an automobile at 25 mph is enough to do serious damage to the person. What you've described is autonomous driving at a walking pace, and somehow that doesn't sound so appealing.
https://ktla.com/news/california/company-refutes-claim-that-...
Where one party is motivated by profit and the other is not, I'm inclined to believe the latter. Having seen Cruise vehicles get wedged in traffic first hand I'm inclined to believe the fire department.
> An internal San Francisco Fire Department report said a Cruise autonomous vehicle delayed an ambulance from transporting Davis to hospital, contributing to his death.
> Now, the fire chief says the report was inaccurate in a joint statement with the SFMTA in which they call Davis' death "an all-around heartbreaking and tragic incident."
> "The San Francisco Fire Chief has not attributed this pedestrian death to Cruise AVs," the statement said. "The city sends our deepest condolences to [the] family and friends of the victim."
https://sfstandard.com/2023/09/12/muni-bus-killed-san-franci...