[Animats]

No, what that gets you is smooth normal driving and poor handling of emergency situations. People have tried using supervised learning for that - vision and human actions for training, steering and speed out. Works fine, until it works really badly, because it has no model of what to do in trouble.

[mickronome]

While I understand the issues, it's still much better in the sense that it doesn't kill anyone while failing to learn how to drive. The fact that we fail to develop something without exposing people to risk doesn't create a right to expose people to risk. It should be seen as either an impassible obstacles, or motivation to solve the problem of learning safely.

Some argume that it is okay, because it will decrease risks in traffic in the long run. This is not a valid argument to allow on road bug-testing, as there is a lot of medical research that we as a society don't allow because of ethical concerns, even some research where the risk of death is essentially zero. Applying research ethics to the Uber situation, Ubers vehicles would under no circumstances be allowed on the road until it could be proven that they were at least as safe as all vehicles already operating on the road.

So while the technique suggested might not work well to solve the problem of safe autonomous cars, the more dangerous alternatives should absolutely not be allowed.