Hacker News Reader

Comment by bryanlarsen | Hacker News Reader

If cars were invented in 2024, there's no way that the general public would be permitted to drive them. We freak out over new products that result in a few deaths, let alone 40,000 per year.

View on HN

I'm not so convinced. People talk similarly about the issues that smart phones have caused with the rise of social media but only fringe political groups want their use restricted by law (with exceptions, such as while driving). I'd expect the most popular opinion to be that the convenience outweighs the cost.

(Of course, as a sibling comment points out, it's impossible to really know.)

Like smoking in the 1960s.

This is hard to say because an alternate universe where the car didn’t exist would be quite different and may have not led to our contemporary understanding and management of risk in the first place.

Status quo bias is very strong. If you proposed accepting tens of thousands of fatalities per year, bulldozing entire city neighborhoods, kids not being able to cross the street safely, smog, and constant traffic noise people would be horrified. One common justification NIMBYs use is increased traffic aka the burden other drivers impose on a neighborhood by driving through. Ironically instead of identifying the root of the problem (too many cars and the subsidized infrastructure supporting them) they blame one of the solutions (more housing).

People often say this about bicycles too. It is appealing, but difficult to say. Self-driving cars are being invented and they are allowed (with restrictions).

My guess is if the invention had a big corporation behind and enough economic potential it would get passed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com