|
|
|
|
|
|
by buvanshak
2929 days ago
|
|
|
>No, the point you're pretending I'm missing is that there is this potential No. You are not missing the potential. But you do not seem to get difference in magnitude. One is incremental, reviewed safety enhancement, Other is unpredictably catastrophic. You only seem to grasp very superficial aspects of my comments, which is why I requested to give some thought before responding. So I think there is some kind of barrier. But it is not of language. but for lack of a better word, I think it is of a lack of enough shared sensibilities.. |
|
|
Right now human driving is one of the leading causes of death. I believe that technology can eventually eliminate this as a leading cause of death. So I project a much greater potential upside. I also figure this is a matter of time and effort applied to the problem. Or in other words, there is a finite amount of time before an update brings the car to this point. This puts a ceiling on my mental tabulation of the amount of risk endured prior to achieving an extremely good end. So despite the severe risks, the limited nature of that risk allows me to rule in favor of taking the risk despite its presence.
You're assuming that I haven't pictured a sweeping update which adds the car murdering anyone who was unaware. I have! Your assumption is incorrect.
And if I was being superficial, I would have answered that yes, I'm a software developer. But its a fallacious appeal to authority.