[melling]

Yeah, everyone’s got that one story in a billion that tries to be the counter example.

I remember back in the day when seatbelts were controversial because someone was thrown free from a car.

[erisian]

It's a bit of a stretch to compare software overriding intentional input from the driver to the introduction of seatbelts.

[dsfyu404ed]

AEB is absolute magic for preventing rear endings by distracted drivers in stop and go traffic. People who's behavior doesn't tend to come with much risk of this will experience mostly false positives from AEB hence why "everyone" has a story.

[mrguyorama]

Also, as shown in this very comment section, lots of people swear "the machine is just wrong" while being terrible drivers and tailgating

[macintux]

Many of us are quite familiar with the reliability of software, and have serious concerns about trusting it to make the right decisions in a complex real-world situation.

[melling]

Yes, that would include me.

We really should work on software reliability.

As for humans, 35,000 Americans die every year on the roads and 6 million accidents occur.

I think we should be able to get software reliable enough to reduce that by 10x

[zip1234]

Many of us are quite familiar with the reliability of humans and have serious concerns about trusting them to make the right decisions in a complex real-world situation.

There are almost 2 million rear end collisions in the US every year. Humans just don't have the reaction times to handle many situations. That is also best case. Many people are distracted while driving.