Coming in late on this thread, but the self driving topic is so interesting, I want to backlog some responses in there
As for the comments about not wanting to ever drive the speed limit⌠I am from Montana. Even in a place where âthe next town overâ is 4 hours away, speeding does not buy you a notable amount of time at the end of things. Within your city, it means FAR less. I long ago realized that increasing the probability of your and otherâs deaths is not worth a few moments. Meanwhile, the productivity or relaxation you can fit in during the full time of a commute? THAT is worthwhile.
As to difficulties needing to be overcome for self driving cars to function⌠Roads are a recognizable form, and donât tend to move around much. You can pretty easily program in every single road with accelerometers and GPS combined in such a way that the car knows precisely where the road is, regardless of complete fog and white out or snow cover. The one thing which can be different about a road is construction, which is clearly marked, and can be equipped with additional electronic broadcasting to update self driving cars.
For the ethics concerns⌠those donât come up. Like⌠EVER. And once again, the computer vision and added sensors mean that the self driving cars are even less capable of ever being placed in such a situation. It can know there is a kid behind a row of cars moving erratically, and slow down. Absolutely any situation I have read where the trolley problem is brought up, there is a logical error in assuming the self driving car has to wait until the proposed moment to make the impossible decision.
The idea of making self driving cars broadcast/identify themselves to human drivers⌠I actually can dig that. Gut reaction was âHELL NO!â But, reflection on the idea reveals that the analysis here is all wrong. People said that human drivers would take advantage of the self driving cars. But⌠I think law enforcement is more likely to take advantage of the cameras on the road able to record and report bad driving instantly. And in this light, just as a police car is clearly marked because of the danger of legal repercussion⌠you would need the self driving car marked.
For society accepting self driving cars⌠look at the history of the automobile being adopted. Roads used to be primarily foot traffic. It took no time at all for the convenience of speed to completely reconfigure what we consider a city/town to be.
Yes⌠eventually a self driving car will happen to result in a death or disability, in spite of the sensors and algorithms. And at that time, there will be outcry, especially if a child is in ANY way connected (even just their parent being severely injured). But, once again⌠cars equipped with cameras can be leveraged to build social capital. Make sure to show everyone every single life saved because of autonomous driving. There wonât be many, because most cases that kill people now simply wonât happen. But let us see the car which avoids running over the idiot child running into the street a few dozen times before the inevitable accident in a case no human could have avoided either. Make sure people understand that the cars are better, and when they finally show they are not flawless, emotions will be tempered.
As for the later in the thread discussion about job losses⌠those are rampant. And it is why automation and assured minimum lifestyle are so big in conversations lately. Having a basic living guaranteed is possible with automation widespread enough to support people without any people being involved in the process. And once we CAN do that, guaranteed minimum lifestyle will remove the need to consider job loss as a concern. It will also enable people to get up and move to a place where the local politics fit their preferences, rather than wail and moan about the situation they are âforcedâ to stay in.