[sigmar]

>human drivers’ tendency to take risks and cut corners, and well, that, in itself, might indicate driverless cars’ risk aversion is an accident waiting to happen (at least when human drivers are also in the mix).

You can try all you want, but there is absolutely no way to spin people rear-ending a stopped car as anything but human error.

[a3n]

> You can try all you want, but there is absolutely no way to spin people rear-ending a stopped car as anything but human error.

That's true, as stated. But it also may be that a significant mix of driven and driverless cars increases the likelihood of human at fault accidents, because we have learned to anticipate how other humans drive. We are, after all, not robots.

[sigmar]

The article goes on to say

>However the difficulties caused by the co-mingling of human and robot driving styles is also in ample evidence.

Which is not true at all based on the three examples they choose to highlight (all three state that the autonomous car was appropriately stopped).