[Forge36]

It's about risk trade off. If it's 2x better than humans is it worth it? 10x? 100x?

36,096 deaths in 2019 in U.S. ~1.3 million worldwide (I couldn't find injury statistics this morning)

If the flaw is found before someone dies from it I'm not concerned. If 1 person dies instead of 10 I'm all for it. (I'd take 2x better than humans any day)

[tragomaskhalos]

The problem is, it's not a level playing field. 100 incidents of a person ploughing into a bus queue and killing a child, each is news for a day, everyone accepts the tragedy and moves on. A self-driving car does it once though, and the mob will be at the factory gates with torches and pitchforks.

[Forge36]

That's an interesting problem. I wonder what social discussions need to take to reach acceptance for "AI assisted driving". Mandatory AI breaking to prevent driving into a bus queue?

I'm also curious how to find the people who do object vs theory-crafting all possible concerns people could have.

[mplewis]

We can’t ignore core usability and basic safety issues by saying “on average, this is better.” End users can’t be expected to know that they’ll probably be fine, but an edge case they don’t understand will kill them one evening when they drive past a stopped ambulance.

[Forge36]

Why not? If it saves 30,000 lives per year is that not a meaningful improvement? I suspect my understanding/acceptance of "unknown risk while driving" is flawed in some way, or at least very different from the general populace.