There are some good and bad examples in this article. It is a easy side to choose weather you want to agree or disagree with the development of theses cars. The side I would have too choose is not to agree with the development of these cars.

I would have to disagree because if i'm driving down the road and the car stops working because of an accident that happened. Who's fault is it? Like the article said, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver or the maufacture?" If it is the cars fault, the driver would be aloud to sue for the faulty of the car. If it was the drivers fault, then they would have to pay for the damage they have caused.

What would happen if the sensors in the car stop working, in the middle of the person driving? Let's say you're driving down the road, the car in front of you slams on their breaks because of a read light. Your car can't stop because of the sensors are not working, you can't take control because the car has control to stop you. You skid down the road, hitting the other car. What happens next?

In conclusion, before they start selling these cars, they could at least take more time fixing the things that go wrong. Would you want to have something go wrong with the car, then it be your fault? They could try something new if they can't seem to fix the problem. Or maybe they should just stop trying to take away some of the driving privliges from the customers. This is not a good idea for the future. It could go wrong in so many ways.