Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
With technology rapidly evolving, new devices can be developed and old ones can be improved. However, not all old devices need to be improved further upon. For example, self-driving cars seems to be a catastrophe of an idea. They require manual driving in certain haphazard situations, such as navigating work zones. They also lack human caution and feeling, and bring up serious legal issues.

First off, a "driverless" car is not truly autonomous; it requires to be maunally driven in certain situations such as work zones and etc. In paragraph 7, the passage reads that "...all are designed to notify when the road ahead requires human skills...This means the human driver must remain alert..."

This means that the human driver must fight off any other distractions and focus on the road despite the fact that they are not driving. This would entirely contradict the purpose of a driverless car. However, manufacturers are proposing an alert system so the driver can be notified in the event something like that does happen. Ironically, that feature would be abused and drivers would be conditioned to begin to pay attention to the road after that system is set off. A faulty piece of hardware can easily cause that system to bypass a hazard or work zone. This would result in potential harm to the driver, passenger(s), workers, and even other vehicles.

In addition, driverless cars lack the perception and understanding of a human driver. For example, if someone is stranded on the side of a road and needs help, or their car needs to be jump started,a driverless car is not going to stop for them. It lacks empathy and generosity. Only a human driver is capable of helping out anyone who is stranded or needs help. Another huge problem with the autonomous automobiles is that there are legal gaps and anomalies when it comes to any damages done by these cars. The passage brings up an important point in paragraph 9. It says "...new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident." This brings up an immense anomoly: if two of these driverless cars crash into each other, who is liable and who is immune to any legal claims? Would the manufacturer be liable or the driver be liable? What if a driverless car crashed into a regular car, or someone's child? There would be too many new regulations and concerns wiht the law if these cars were mass manufactored. It would also be relatively unfair if a driver who did not program the car's GPS and driving system was sued and held reliable.

In conclusion, these machines require the quick and panicky control of a human driver in a random situation, and also lack human emotion and compassion in case any specail situation does occur, such as someone's car breaking down and etc. In addition to that, they also bring up many legal impracticalities and complications. Although they make traveling alot easier on the driver, they are not a safe, practical, or reliable invention that enhances the quality of human life. There is nothing wrong with the tradition of manually driving a car so why change it?

Score: 4