[gizajob]

I keep thinking the key is to make 100% of cars self-driving, and networked so they can all communicate and negotiate, which takes the unpredictability and lack of attention of human drivers out of the equation, and then pedestrians and cyclists will adapt. If this was the case, then you could probably get rid of traffic lights and speed limits...but it's the kind of solution to accommodate software solutions that could handle it successfully (I don't like the term AI, because I don't think there's any such thing on a philosophical level). The only problem then remains with the small percentage of drivers left that are determined to drive, like sports car users and motorcyclists, who could interrupt the system by taking advantage of the stability afforded by it. Again, this could be resolved by fitting them with beacons, say, that communicate information about where they are and where they're going, but it'll be a hard sell. I'm pretty sure that most people aren't bothered in the slightest about driving themselves to work every day and operating a steering wheel and pedals to do it, if you could offer them a solution where they could be on their phones and don't have to drive themselves.

[cpgxiii]

The problem with V2X (vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure) is that it is impossible to make it secure. Lots of work has been done on V2X protocols and ideas of operations, and none of them solve the fundamental problem that no one has a clue as to how to make such a large scale system secure against hostile actors. At best, every car would have to be continuously solving a Byzantine Generals problem for all V2X inputs, and those "solutions" don't really solve the problem.

Either the car is capable enough of operating by itself that V2X information is non-essential, or it is an extortion and assassination machine waiting to happen. Think ransomware locking away your documents and family pictures is bad already? Try "pay us 10 bitcoins or you die in a car accident on your commute home today".