|
|
|
|
|
|
by borplefark
3630 days ago
|
|
|
>But must the standard for safety be higher than existing human drivers Yes. Imagine that it crashes with the same average incidence rate as humans. Humans are imperfect creatures. They break the law. Let's even say that only 1% of crashes involve someone breaking the law (intoxicated, no licence etc). If the car is only on par with humans, then the car is only able to match a law abiding citizen 99% of the time. You could argue that the car is basically driving buzzed. We have laws that would arrest 1 out of every 100 of those humans, but what would we do to the algorithm? What sort of punishment could you do to it when it messes up? |
|
|
Speeding? Let's then raise that 1% to like 40% or something. Looking at some random sources[0][1], all the most common causes of traffic fatalities are the ones machines already deal better with than humans. Distracted driving? Check. Failure to stay in lane? Check. Speeding? Check. People die on the roads mostly because drivers behave like idiots or hit their natural limitations.
[0] - http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cause-of-the-most-fatal-c...
[1] - http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/07/20/the-6-most-commo...