Self driving liability - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 03:02:24 am
content: I came across an article today about new rules being drafted that accidents caused by self driving cars to fall with the insurance company. I don't know how the insurance company will apply this, whether they'll up the charges for everybody or just those with self driving cars if they become involved in too many accidents.Shouldn't it be the manufacturer responsibility in a situation for any accident caused by decisions it makes without notifying the driver to resume driving?https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/apr/20/self-driving-car-users-could-watch-films-on-motorway-under-new-dft-proposalsQuoteI see they are letting a bit of slack off the drivers for slow speed and in congestion as I have seen many do already over the decades but that can change very quickly attimes.What if a vehicle is self driving and the driver is on their own watching stuff and becomes tired and looses too much attention to be alerted?1How can she be certain of this?2It could just be an excuse for someone not to control their vehicle.Doesn't sound safe to me.3A customer may just want it to drive from A to B, make savings on the fuel/electric bill, cost of insurance, cost of maintenance of the vehicle and may not care or appreciate any fancy stuff that may or may not be provided with it.4I have to find this public consultation.They are talking about it in the name of: "global science superpower", “revolutionise the way we travel”, "boosting economic growth" when some drivers could be made too complacent "appreciating the onboard fancy stuff to a point of being alert to control their car.I know in the past they charged young drivers more in the UK for things like turbo's (okay that could encourage speeding), four wheel drive (maybe I seeing it wrong but isn't that suppose to give the car more grip nd make it safe in certain conditions such as ice) and if I remember many years before that power steering which helps steer.What do you think?

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 03:15:08 am
content: The day will never come that I turn over driving my car to an AI.OTOH, I rather like battery EVs. Turn on "Sport" mode and they get downright frisky.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 03:07:32 pm
content: I could see an argument for making the insurance company responsible, which would get around some tricky legal rabbit holes. However, what I can't figure is why watching TV would be OK but using a mobile not - at least with a mobile you could be watching the road at the same time!

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 03:17:24 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 03:07:32 pmYou don't really want to dis-incentivize hands free calling, breeds bad habits. Most of the time these cars won't be self driving after all, just during long motor-way traffic jams.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 03:47:27 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 03:07:32 pmI don't know how car insurance in the UK works. Over here in the NL the owner of the car is supposed to have insurance that covers any damage caused from using the vehicle. That ofcourse doesn't mean the driver can do as he/she pleases. The driver is responsible for adhering to the traffic laws. I wonder how that would play out if the self driving system is 'responsible'. Think about speeding tickets. With the insurance company being liable for the self driving system, it would also mean that they would need to pay parking and speeding tickets.All in all it seems much more logical to me to have the driver liable for any traffic law violations. After all it is the driver who chooses to enable the self driving system.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 04:00:34 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 03:07:32 pmThe logic is that the TV is part of the car's built-in infotainment system, so it can be automatically disabled when the self-driving system needs to hand control back to the human operator.A mobile phone is a physically separate device, not under the control of the vehicle's electronics, so it can't be disabled in the same way.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 05:42:32 pm
content: Liability of AI-based stuff has been discussed in quite a few other threads. That's a burning topic.The problem is that it's almost intractable in the general case. But I think this inevitably leads, in time, to a complete change in the very concept of liability. IMO (and backed by arguments we can read here and there by AI "proponents"), this is leading to a society governed purely by statistics, not by responsibility or liability.What that means is that, if some automated system statistically gives a lower accident ratio than the usual, human-driven system, then one can literally forget about liability altogether. The fact insurance companies are already considered for almost blindingly paying for any damage goes entirely with this idea. If one can convince insurance companies that self-driving vehicles will significantly lower the overall accident risk, then they can be convinced (and laws follow) that there is no need to define any liability: it would cost more than just paying for damages and calling it a day.Of course, while many find this perfectly reasonable and a nice progress, that poses unique moral and ethics issues.But business isn't known to bother about either much.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 05:43:41 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 21, 2022, 03:47:27 pmTechnically, yes. The driver is the responsible person here too. But practically you can't expect a human to remain alert and on the ball when he's traveled for 2 hours doing absolutely nothing at all. So you might then suggest that where the human has handed over control to a certified (because it will need to be) automated system, that system is reasonably in control. And the responsible entity for making sure it works is the manufacturer. But I can't see any manufacturer selling stuff if they're going to face serious charges for anything and everything that goes on.Insurance companies, OTOH, can be engaged by the manufacturer and the driver, and they'll be able to price in the cost of being the responsible entity. Further, they can refuse to insure where they think it's a bum deal, which would have the effect of removing dodgy stuff/people from the market/road without any lengthy court cases.Quote from: AndyC_772Surely the deciding factor should be whether it distracts the driver or not, regardless of how it's supplied.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 07:28:23 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 05:43:41 pmThat's precisely the logic that's being applied - the in-car TV cannot distract the driver because it's switched off when the driver is required to take control, whereas a phone can't be automatically disabled by the car's systems and so can be a distraction.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 07:47:39 pm
content: The implication there is that the drivermustwatch TV in order to be notified to take control! What if he just wants to watch the scenery? If he can be notified without the TV for that, the same applies for whatever else he is doing.Further, even if the TV goes blank and flashedEMERGENCYin big red letters, the driver is going to take a long time to get his act together and die horribly. The 'TV turns off when appropriate' thing appears to be to notify the driver that he's approaching his off junction rather than for something going wrong. Loud sirens, flashing lights, juddering brakes... all can be used to distract the phone user.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 07:59:58 pm
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 21, 2022, 03:02:24 amIt sounds like you're assuming that accidents will increase with automated driving whereas the automotive industry predicts fewer accidents. Or, the accidents that do happen will be less severe and less costly.In any case, I think that the typical reaction of distrust comes from a lack of understanding. The fact is, there might be a time far in the future where we get into a car, tell the car where we want to go, and then wait to arrive. But, that's not the near future. The visions of Elon Musk aside, autodriving will come incrementally and has already begun on a large scale. Many new cars today will brake autonomously if an imminent collision is detected. Adaptive cruise control is common place and appreciated (and trusted!) by lots of drivers. Alarms squeal if the car drifts out of lane or gets too close to another car while moving. It's just a small step to have the steering respond automatically topreventan accident. It's just one more small step to setting your cruise control on the highway and letting the car not only maintain a safe speed automatically, but also maintain a safe distance from the car in front (already common place) and steer automatically to stay in lane. I trust adaptive cruise control, and I think it wouldn't be hard for me to trust a system that follows the road automatically.That's still a long ways from the car with a digital chauffeur, but add GPS....Anyway, the goal is not just to make things more convenient for the lazy, but to make traveling safer for everyone. Personally, I think I would feel safer traveling 70mph down the highway if I knew that all of the cars around me were controlled by sophisticated automated equipment and not by a human that's tired or irritated or distracted.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 08:02:09 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 07:47:39 pmWorse yet, the driver may think that this screen is part of the movie and do nothing.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 08:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on April 21, 2022, 08:02:09 pmBTDT. Well, not quite but similar.In a previous life I was a projectionist, and often I would amble into the auditorium to monitor proceedings. One time I'm a watching a scene in a film and the screen goes completely white - can't recall what the film was about but the possibility of an explosion in the story wasn't far fetched. Took me a few very long seconds to realise the film had broken before rushing off to fix it. In fact, I might have been the last to figure it out

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 08:52:42 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on April 21, 2022, 03:15:08 amYes for me the whole point in owning a car, especially a relatively high performance car is that I get to drive it myself. I drove a Tesla Y for a bit and it was a blast. Fastest car I've ever driven.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2022, 08:55:38 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 07:47:39 pmI think it's totally obvious and expected that this will happen. It is well proven that if you take away the necessity to focus, the brain very quickly finds something else to be absorbed in. It is completely unreasonable to have a machine driving a car and expect a human driver to be able to take over at any time. There is no way that a human is going to stay engaged for more than a few minutes of the machine driving before they zone out and mentally disconnect. The accident will be over before they realize what happened.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 04:25:32 am
content: Isn't there a similar problem for airline pilots on long flights when the autopilot is flying?

author: david77
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 07:50:52 am
content: I don't see self driving cars materialising in a big way any time soon. It's like AI and nuclear fusion: Marketing hype.It's much more probable that the era of individual transport will be largely over (relatively) soon.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 09:38:20 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 21, 2022, 05:43:41 pmI can follow that logic but it makes me wonder: what about speeding tickets? And what in case the car isn't insured (I know cars should be insured by law but there are still situations where people drive around without insurance)?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 11:11:12 am
content: QuoteThat's a good question. The other day I dropped into a 50 limit (from a 70) and reset my cruise control, except that on this vehicle the control operates the opposite way to my other vehicle. Instead of setting the new speed to 50 it reverted to the previously set 70 and shot up above the limit before I realised. Could I have argued in court that I hadn't intended to speed, and although I was notionally in control the vehicle didn't respond appropriately to my reasonable command? (Yes, I know it was my fault for giving the wrong command, but I could argue about intention and reasonable confusion.)Currently I believe I would get the nick, but there must be some point at which a competent person is reasonably unable to affect the result. Do they still get nicked anyway, or where is that point?

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 11:23:48 am
content: I would rather focus on manufacturer’s liability. In USA there is no liability limit, and no insurance company would be able to protect self-driven car manufacturer from enormous claims. A successful class action following several fatal accidents would be able to bring any self-driven car maker to the brink of bankruptcy.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 12:30:23 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 22, 2022, 04:25:32 amI am only familiar with US FAA rules. We have 3 categories: Scheduled airlines, Private and charter (i.e., "General Aviation"), and Military.Large scheduled airliners are highly integrated. I learned recently, for example, that in landing, the pilot cannot control some functions like braking and reverse thrust if the radar altimeter and/or some other electronic functions do not work. There was a recent example on a transcontinental flight to Paris. Plane was in good shape, but something was wrong with the automatic landing system(s), and the pilots had to declare an emergency. Add, of course the 737 MAX disasters of a couple of years ago. Boeing has that liability. My take was that I don't want to fly in any airplane where having the pilots in control is an emergency.In smaller GA aircraft, the pilot is responsible. Sure, the manufacturers get sued too, but the FAA assigns blame on the pilot(s) regardless of the autopilot. (Some large aircraft used for scheduled service are also flown under GA rules.) It is not uncommon to see an accident report with the conclusion that the pilot failed to maintain a safe altitude and/or airspeed. As just one example, there was an incident in Southern California many years ago in which the ground radar controller vectored a small GA Beechcraft into a mountain. The pilot was still blamed for not maintaining awareness of the terrain.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 03:14:15 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on April 21, 2022, 03:15:08 amThis times 100,000! IMO if the "rider" wants to go somewhere and doesn't want to "drive" then they should take a cab or a bus!The "Economic growth" and other arguments in favor of self driving vehicles are total BS IMO! Well for everyone other than the lawyers that will be needed when the driverless vehicles start running people down..

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 03:22:11 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 21, 2022, 08:52:42 pmI've never looked at one and don't know a lot about them buy my brother in law just ordered a model Y and he usually knows what he's doing.And I completely agree that being able DRIVE is the complete point of owning any car. I would absolutely HATE living in any big city where car ownership and/or driving was impossible.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 03:34:39 pm
content: This thread illustrates the dominance of emotion over logic in discussions of this topic. Specifically the arguments about liability for speeding tickets when in self driving mode.In my mind there is only a very minor argument here. In general, in self driving mode the car should never speed. There are only two reasons I can think of for this not being the case. First, if the vendor of the software set it that way. In which case liability is obvious and indisputable. The second case is if the speed limit has changed and the database available to the self driving software is not updated. Liability here could be disputable, but this is relatively uncommon (and also likely to trip up a human driver).

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 04:10:56 pm
content: When driving is outlawed, only outlaws will drive cars.That's a joke, meant to highlight the lunacy and paranoia. Nobody has even hinted that driving will be outlawed in the foreseeable future.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 04:18:19 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on April 22, 2022, 03:34:39 pmYou forget the third case: speed limits can be changed quickly and regulary (think about road works which can also move). Also on many roads there are dynamic speed limits depending on congestion levels. All in all it is very easy to miss a sign that tells the speed limit has changed and a database doesn't help. When using Google maps it happens very often that it indicates the wrong speed limit while there are fixed signs on a highway.Road works are particulary nasty because the signs aren't always clear. In France for example there isn't always sign that indicates the end of the road works. You just have to deduce that from the section marked with orange cones ending. Another example are parallel roads with different speed limits. Even for a human it is easy to get confused.The bottom line is: a self driving car will be getting speeding tickets even though the intention is not to exceed the speed limit.BTW: I'm not against self driving cars at all. On the contrary; I think that they will give me freedom when I'm too old to drive by myself so I don't have to depend on family members or crappy bus service. And hopefully before that an opportunity to do something usefull or just enjoy the landscape during a journey instead of operating a machine that -from a basic operating point of view- hasn't really evolved for over 100 years. I do find the legal implications interesting though.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 10:44:30 pm
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on April 22, 2022, 12:30:23 pmYou have it back to front:"International Fatality Rates, A Comparison of Australian Civil Aviation Fatality Rates with International Data"https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/32897/b20060002.pdfor TLDR/easier to digest:https://skybrary.aero/articles/general-aviation-gaFlying on non-scheduled air transport, particularly private (rather than charter), is much much more dangerous by 1-2 orders of magnitude. The measure of fatalities per 100,000 hours is easy to measure for that industry, but the gap is even wider if you use the more sensible fatalities per billion passenger km. I'm sticking to the pilots forced to be conservative by the commercial airline industry, its a system that works and has an excellent track record to back it up.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2022, 10:48:23 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on April 22, 2022, 03:22:11 pmThe purpose/reason/delivery of public roads is not for your recreation. So you're still free to rent out a race track or private road (they exist in many countries) for all your driving pleasure.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 12:29:27 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 22, 2022, 04:18:19 pmYou case is exactly case two. Liability in that case is debatable. Even the facts are debatable. What if the variable limit sign changes after you pass?

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 12:34:28 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 22, 2022, 04:18:19 pmMost new cars now read traffic signs. They aren't always that reliable, but if a car is going to self drive, rather than just assist the driver, it had better be able to reliably read those signs. If it can't even read something as predicable as traffic signs, how is it going to detect and react properly to less well structured things happening around it?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 02:24:56 am
content: Quote from: coppice on April 23, 2022, 12:34:28 amYou didn't get my point: speed limit signs aren't always obvious which means that a self driving car will get a speeding ticket every now and then. With the 'driver' not being liable while the self driving system is on, who is going to pay for the ticket given the proposed laws in the first post?Debating how well or not a self driving car can read signs is not relevant at all in this discussion because the underlying assumption is that self driving cars are certified / road legal.

author: chickenHeadKnob
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 06:03:44 am
content: OK, what insurance company pays for this one:Tesla which is being "smart summoned" crashes into private jet on Earth day. LoL

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 06:28:00 am
content: Quote from: chickenHeadKnob on April 23, 2022, 06:03:44 amNo insurance company will ever be paying. It will be in the premium car owners pay. It isn't simple semantics. That is the way to think about it. Similarly with arguments that suggest anyone (other than the car owner and/or driver) or any corporation will ever be paying speeding tickets or any other driving related liability arising from a self driving system. The world cannot afford the cost of the lawsuits.Someone will have to accept the responsibility as the "driver" just like we do now when we turn the key. There is no way the legal implications will be resolved before the automation firmware is perfected (which I claim will never happen). Self driving cars on public roads is a Utopian dream that will never materialise. I can accept automated trains, mining trucks and farm tractors and maybe even excavators but none of those operate on public roads.If self driving cars ever truly materialise they will not have a steering wheel and brake pedals. If they do then that is an admission they are imperfect and require human override.I claim it is a fallacy, a myth, to think self driving cars are a solution to crowded roads or bad driving or poorly designed cities over dependence on cars.

author: chickenHeadKnob
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 08:53:07 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 23, 2022, 06:28:00 amGood point. I have always looked at property crime as an act of indirect enslavement, but never extended that logic to the moral hazard of deferred corporate negligence.By enslavement I mean that a car thief who steals a car across town is enslaving me through the mechanism of increased premiums.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 09:17:17 am
content: Have a look how many times the nose landing gear system fails in the same aircraft verses how many times and the reasons they try and blame the pilots.

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 12:07:19 pm
content: @Someone Post #27My ISP was down for almost 12 hours yesterday. Sorry for the late response.I find accident data interesting as choice of denominator has a huge influence. For aircraft operations, is it operations, passenger miles, total flight time, etc.? The Australian report uses ATM's (aircraft transport movements). If accurate, that is probably a decent measure, but how accurate is it? For example, a small GA aircraft may make multiple approaches with or without landing and taking off. I don't believe those are logged by the tower, if there is one*, yet they involve the most dangerous phases of flight.Rates per passenger mile is deceptive as scheduled carriers log far more passenger miles than GA for a single airplane. That is, most GA flights are over shorter distances than scheduled carrier flights and have far fewer passengers per flight.*Unless there is an accident. In the US, we have lots of uncontrolled airports. The "pattern" at those airports used to be quite crowded on weekends and holidays. Today, they are far less crowded. One can still practice approaches with or without a tower.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 01:58:24 pm
content: The best thing about self driving cars, is how they are an excellent intelligence test for people. Ask anyone if they think self driving cars are a good idea. In a few moments you'll know whether they are sane or a delusional, amoral lunatic. Whether they understand the nature of consciousness and the importance of having a comprehensive model of the world around them. Whether they understand the dilema of 'strong AI' at all, or think a world with AI slaves would be just peachy.Anyway, it's all very entertaining (except for side effects like car insurance rates going up.)Here's an example of the kind of expensive comedy that self-driving cars (with less than strong AI) will keep on giving:Tesla on Autopilot Crashes Into $3 Million JetI particularly enjoyed how the car seemed to think "Wait, did I just hit something? Nah, it's all good, I'll keep going. Uh, no, something is definitely wrong."Then there was that other hilarious case (last year?) where a Tesla car on highway autopilot decapitated it's occupant by trying to drive under a semi that was pulling out of a side road.If cars end up being given strong AI, then there will be a whole different world of problems.And they _would_ be given strong AI as soon as it's developed. Except for other more immediate world factors that will make all such future issues moot.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 02:28:45 pm
content: There are certainly many examples of self driven cars doing stunningly stupid things. Unfortunately the same is true for human drivers. I know two people who drove at high speed into objects (not suicides). That is within a group of people I know well enough to have gone to dinner or attended the same party. A group that totals at most a few thousand people.Any claim for superiority of one method to another is very weakly supported.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 02:57:01 pm
content: Did I say human drivers don't do stupid things? Nope. Just today I was a few meters away (on foot) from a near accident where a human driver did something very stupid, and the two cars involved screeched to a stop about a foot apart.But it's a logical fallacy to argue that because human drivers screw up, we should allow 'AI' self-driving cars.Even if somehow self-driving cars managed to have fewer accidents per mile driven, less injuries, etc, it would still be a very bad idea.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 09:42:12 pm
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on April 23, 2022, 02:57:01 pmDon't mistake me for an AI fanboi, but I don't understand how anything that makes traveling safer can be a "very bad idea."In any case, I'm certain that I see the entire topic differently than most of the contributors to this thread. (I find it comical that a bunch of off-duty engineers think they understand the issues better than the on-duty engineers working in the auto industry.) Only nutjobs like Elon Musk think it's a good idea to make a car that is completely driverless and sell ittoday. On the other hand, ALL of the major auto manufacturers are investing big money and effort on the topic in a more general way. None of GM, VAG or Toyota are going to be offering cars that drive around a tarmac and crash into anything in the way. The reason is obvious and the major topic of this thread: liability.But, they are doing all of the research that their enormous resources allow. And in the course of their research they will develop all sorts of ways to build cars thatassistthe driver, possibly in surprising ways. The consequence can only be that the cars will be MORE safe. No major auto manufacturer (Telsla not withstanding) is going to introduce features that make traveling less safe. It's just not part of their business plan.Anyway, all of this assisted driving will eventually result in auto-driving. In the meantime (i.e. today) we can have fun talking about the what ifs, but it's all essentially hypothetical because unless Google starts making cars, Tesla will be the only example we have for discussion, and they aren't even close to typical.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 10:15:03 pm
content: Quote from: eugene on April 23, 2022, 09:42:12 pmThe latter is not quite right. Tesla drums up a lot of hype about their brand but the reality is that theirassisteddriving system (currently SAE level 2) is severly lagging behind on the competition. For example: Mercedes offers 'Drive pilot' which is an SAE level 3automateddriving system on their S class models for use in Germany. BMW is close to introducing a SAE level 3 automated driving system but seems to struggle with the regulatory framework in the EU:https://electricvehicleweb.com/bmw-ix-level-3-autonomous-driving/Getting the legal framework in order soon is important because there will be more and more cars on the road with automated driving systems.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 11:32:04 pm
content: Thank you. I stand corrected.I still contend that, at least in the next decade, assisted driving will play a much larger part than fully autonomous driving. In some case, like an imminent collision, the car might take over completely from the driver, but that's still a long way from the sci-fi notion of putting your kids in the car and telling it to take them to school, then come right back.I guess that I am ironically responding emotionally to other's emotions.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:30:33 am
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on April 23, 2022, 12:07:19 pmYes, typically shorter distances for GA does somewhat bias their safety figures in the negative, as does hours of aircraft operation. But that alone still doesn't explain the enormous differences in fatality rates between the different modes (having already removed the very very risky agricultural operations from the figures). I suggest most of it are the additional "restrictive" rules that the large airlines enforce, which will be a similar situation when self driving cars arrive.Big businesses with large exposure will be much more risk averse than an "insured" individual who doesn't see significant loss from their (in)action. So expect self driving cars that accept the legal liability/responsibility to be much more cautious than human drivers who are exposed to little liability. Offloading externalities of cars to government backed/mandatory insurance has been a huge win for private motoring (similar to the nuclear industry).

author: sleemanj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 02:09:00 am
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on April 22, 2022, 03:14:15 pmWhich may also be driverless...

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 09:25:15 am
content: On the topic of 'AI' astonishing advances:Adding- this too:https://this-person-does-not-exist.com/en