Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Driverless cars may seem like an idea of the future, but they are already here.

Studies have been in progress since the late 1950s and are continually getting more complicated to date.

Driverless cars may seem like the next big thing and look as though they have many upsides to them, yet, the public has still not been offered a genuine driverless car.

Scientists are trying to make something that does not need to be invented, using up funds and donations towards it, when they could be trying to make current cars and roads more safe.

Driverless cars should remain a fantasy of the future and nothing more because they will cost a lot of money to start up and mantain, not all data is complete on them, and they are not as safe as cars with drivers.

Driverless cars will cost a lot of money to make and maintain, and the specialized roads that they will drive on cost more money, too.

Older theories for these cars that involved them being driven on roads with eletrical cables beneath them, or roads that were essentially "magnets," were too expensive to be used.

With the original ideas too expensive, scientists are now researching newer, more cost efficient ways, but even newer cars that are less costley, still cost too much.

The car includes many sensors, cameras, a GPS reciver, and an intertial motion sensor which would cost more many than any regular car, and the most expensive part would be the LIDAR technology used to create a model of the cars surroundings.

Everything added to a smarter car, to make it driverless, that costs much more money than any other car, can all be done for free by the human brain.

All the extra technology gives nothing to prove that it will always work and never give out when someone is in the car.

There is not much data provided on how driverless cars will work and what technically makes them driverless.

One would imagine that with the name "driverless car" that they would not have to drive the car.

Yet, in these cars scientist make an alert system to alert the driver when they must take control of the car.

Driverless cars will lend a false sense of security because someone may decide to take a nap while in one, only to have the alert going off but they do not see or hear it.

The person in a driverless car must remain alert at all times, just as in a regular car, causing the name "driverless car" to be meaningless.

There is nothing saying that these cars will work the way they are supposed to which can cause saftey problems.

Driverless cars are not as safe as cars with drivers.

Not everyone will have a driverless car, and if someone driving a regular car disobeys a traffic law, such as running a red light, how is the driverless car to know or stop on time?

Someone driving in a regular car would be able to swerve or stop at the last minute when seeing someone run a red light, but the driverless car would not be able to.

People can make sudden actions and do uncalled for things when driving, which can be a major disadvantage to driverless cars, but a peron's quick thinking can stop an accident if they are in a regular car.

Driverless cars are costley, do not have enough completed data on them, and are unsafe.

It would be considerabley cheaper and safer to have a human drive a car, because everything that a driverless car does, a human can do without any added technology.

Within driverless cars humans still need to be alert and focused on the road, terminating the reason for a driverless car in the first place.

No information is given as to what would happen if someone in a driverless car were in a wreck with someone in a regular car, or another driverless car for that matter.

Driverless cars are wonderful ideas that should remain as such.

Score: 3