As much as I'd love robot cars to "move fast and break things", making an argument that "well, at least it doesn't kill as many people as teenage drivers" won't fly in court.
This is a dramatic over simplification. What will really matter is whether they work or not. From the performance I've seen, they will work.
It is also worth noting that the technology isn't in question, just the regulations. That means it is just a matter of when, not if.
It doesn't work, we still get sued, and money has to change hands.
I'd love to be laissez-faire about it, but it is a pretty critical issue.
Hemp. Superior is many ways, illegal for a century and counting.
You can buy hemp protein powder on Amazon, I've seen hemp blend shirts (horribly scratchy, for the record).
There is no reason that a fully autonomous fleet of cars is unsafe, only a matter of convincing stubborn old people to embrace advanced technologies.
If the car is unsure of what to do (road conditions change or map doesn't match road) then pull off to the side of the road and wait for a remote human to say "ok, you're clear, carry on".
I think you meant just 'stubborn people', who come in all ages.
I share your concern, but maybe just sort, uh, :) worry about that part later? It could prove to be fatal but it'll be neat to at least see?
I mean, at least quick enough to get a prototype together and then later-on the avionics level of code auditing would take place.
I've worked with former and current avionics engineers before, whom worked with Ada on fighter aircraft or civilian jets. It seems like a few lines of code per day is typical.
A few LOC/day rate is generally accepted to be the overall rate of development from Requirements through Final Verification/Validation. That is, you may write a product of 10kloc in just a few months of coding, but the entire software aspects of the project actually took about 2.5 years to complete.
I don't do avionics (though it sounds like more fun. Greener grass on that side, etc...), but this is the way we measure LOC in medical devices.
To your other point, well, that's easy to say until the people killed are your loved ones. No company that plans to stay in business (or its officers out of jail) can afford to be blase about killing its customers.
I probably should have mentioned that in my original post. :) Yes, they do lots of verification and auditing for any kind of code like that. This includes things like NASA TDRSS, space shuttle fuel flow regulators, etc. The sort of thing where people might die if an exception isn't caught.
They don't necessarily want super-creative worker types itching to break rules, even if the system they are working on is indeed new and perhaps revolutionary. Things like the F35 JSF, etc.
Here's a quote from Warren Buffett (big investor in Geico): "If you end up with no accidents, we will end up with no insurance company"
http://www.reddit.com/r/SelfDrivingCars/comments/1vj99m/warr... (unfortunately the video has been removed)