No. You can only take technology so far, and then you have to test it in real world conditions. That time is now. It is unfortunate that accidents and fatalities will happen, but they have already been happening. That is the issue, are we happy with 30-40000 fatalities, or are we willing to make changes that will substantially reduce those numbers. That what autonomous vehicles bring to the table. There are two situations that we are all going through right now. First, AI is written by humans, who are fallible. Second, we are already in a transition period with autonomous and non-autonomous vehicles in the road. That transition period is problematic, but unavoidable. So, accidents are still unavoidable, but are in the process of being reduced. When all transportation modes are connected and communicating, vehicles will know what other vehicles are doing, and so will bicycles and pedestrians. We will all “know” so the probability of any accident will eventually be extremely low. That kind of a future is worth moving towards.
Makes me wonder how autonomous vehicles will operate in rural areas such as mine, where deer and other wildlife do not use well-lit crossings.
Same type of people who make your computer “work”, your cell phone “work” and a hundred other things that need constant attention are now in charge of making cars drive on their own. Good luck.
More biased headlines. Kill means “cause the death of.” Would you say that the ground killed someone who jumped off a building? Or would you say that the person killed themselves? It is completely incorrect to say that the car killed the pedestrian when the car isn’t at fault.
Comments are closed.