Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottSinger
I think the discussion could be is Tesla creating a danger significantly different that had been accepted in 100 years of automobile travel. We can enforces drugged driving, excessive speed and vehicle mechanical safety as well as poorly designed roads. On the other hand can software / computer hardware associated with non-human interaction be held to the same standards (safety) and enforcement as with human drivers, and is that an advancement we want to accept.
|
I see what you are saying, but I see after 100 years we are still battling drugged driving, excessive speed and mechanical safety - are we not? Have they improved? VASTLY - but each time each of us get into a car - we accept that people will die to have automobiles stay legal.
I don't think we can hold a car any higher. If the net result is 50% less deaths - then the cars are doing better than people right?
If we only accept zero airline casualties - then we ground all airplanes. We at some level have to say a certain number of deaths is acceptable for humans to have air travel. I think the same has to apply here.
Humans driving cars was bad and got better.
Air travel was bad and got better.
We have to accept that the same path will be taken by self driving vehicles - correct? Or do we just never accept them at all?
Edit - this is probably all moot as it does not look like this wreck was a failure of the self driving car anyway, but our points still hold water.