The author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars in the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming". In my opinion based on the reading there are more negative aspects to these cars than positive.

To begin with some positive aspects to driving these cars include, using half the the fuel of todays cars, driven more than half a million miles without a crash, and protect from danger. These driverless claim to use less gas than any other car which would make it more flexible. Without using gas these cars would most likely be using electricity which does lower the pollution levels, this is a positive change. But by using electricity it will likely increase payments in electricity which wont be good for people when paying their bills. These cars also claim to have driven millions of miles without a crash, the negative aspect to this would be that the cars still arent truly driverless. I admit wreckage free driving is a really good thing but even with a non driverless car it could still be free from crashes. You cant blame crashes on the car it is the driver, so the driverless car really isnt that different from a careful driver because either way there are still wreckless drivers that could crash into you.

As i pointed out in the last example, this car claims to protect from danger but they cant say that for everyone. The bad drivers out there could very possibly still hit you even if you are in a driverless car. These cars may be good for when you might hit a car while going in reverse as told in passage 5, "sensors can apply brakes", these sensors can stop you from hitting someone but that probably cant stop someone from hitting you. Finally, yes this car sounds like a luxury claiming to protect from wreckage and drive millions of miles without crashing, but in realitly it wont help you improve your driving skills, by buying this car you will depend mainly on this car but still have to drive it because it is not 100% driverless.

Next,with this car there are many negative aspects that will come with it including the expensiveness, not being truly driverless, and the legal issues. This car being driverless and all is a very expensive car to manufactur. The parts themselves are very expensive to collect, as told in paragraph 6, "radar was a deie on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars". This radar alone is 2 hundred million dollars, that is insane considering that there are a lot more parts going into the car. Another negative aspect to this car would be the fact that this car isnt even 100% driverless. In paragraph 7 it says "special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel" , I mean i dont see what the point is to buy this car if it needs you took pay attention to the road at all times and keep your hands on the wheel. If you were going to have to do this why not you put your foot on the pedals as wheel and just drive a car yourself and not pay the ridiculous prices that this car will consist of. In paragraph 7 it also says "human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires" , if the point of this car is to be driverless then why should a human have to be alert and take over? Finally the last negative aspect to this car is the legal issues that it will bring. In paragraph 9 it states that " in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars". The reason to this law is because states want to make sure that drivers, passagers, and pedestrians are safe, the law, makers believe that safety is best