[ajross]

> You can't just tell every person to "get a car with better proximity detection systems".

Then it's a good thing I didn't.

I was replying (with a bit of humor) to the upthread posters notion that because these cars behave in a way that s/he personally finds confusing they are more dangerous (they aren't) and by extension shouldn't be on the road. And that's ridiculous. And the proof to the contrary is that exactly the kind of unsafe situation the poster was complaining about is something that automated systems can almost completely eliminate.

[kemitche]

Abnormal behavior on the road increases risk by creating unknowns. I don't think we should ban autonomous cars from new behavior, but I think it's just as odd to say that unpredictable but legal behavior is somehow just as safe as predictable legal behavior.

Legal != Safe.

[bluGill]

But in this case we know that there are cases where a reasonable driver will be forced to do the behavior he is calling unexpected. Thus even though it is unexpected it is something that should be accounted for. If you cannot react in time then you need to adjust your behavior. I'm always amazed at how few people follow the 2 second following distance experts tell me is the minimum humans need for reaction time. (which works out to .2 seconds to realize there is a problem and 1.5 second to get your foot physically moved to the brake)