[parenthephobia]

> Of course, it’s just a regular car he drives into it for demonstration purposes.

Because a self-driving car wouldn't have any reason to drive into the circle, so it wouldn't get "caught".

The actual reason a regular car is used is because this is an "art installation" and not a serious critique of self-driving algorithms.

A more effective trap would be a "no entry" sign on a one-way street (or one side of a dual carriageway), positioned so the car can't see it before entering the street.

[gruez]

>A more effective trap would be a "no entry" sign on a one-way street (or one side of a dual carriageway), positioned so the car can't see it before entering the street.

reminds me of rollercoaster tycoon where you could trap guests indefinitely by using that technique.

[dnautics]

you could make a "do not enter" sign with undertext saying "except non-self-driving cars".

[tyingq]

Or just 2 to 3 people at a red light with the bags of salt.

[wglass]

While I agree this simplistic example probably wouldn't work, it's conceptual. Yes, if a road designer wanted to build a road that would trap cars, they could do so. Automated or not automated.

See the XKCD "Highway Engineer Pranks" for examples!

[sand500]

could just surround a car with 4 people. What is it going to do, run someone over?

[Eridrus]

This applies equally well to people driven cars.

[SomeStupidPoint]

People are willing to hit people with their vehicle to escape an attack.

It's doubtful we'll let self-driving cars make that choice (and in fact, would likely be illegal under current laws which prohibit weapons from being automated).

[tyingq]

4 mannequins would be funnier.