[negativeview]

At least here in Minneapolis, a good portion of the train operates down the middle of public streets. It follows red lights and has to deal with people pulling into intersections waiting on a turn signal, stupid pedestrians, etc.

Even WITH drivers two people (that I know of) have been hit in the last two months. The train line wasn't set up with driverless uses in mind in the first place, and the city is likely worried about liability and cost in switching over. Even if the number of accidents goes down with full automation, cities aren't likely to believe that until enough other places prove it for them.

[aragot]

Sure, but wouldn't automation provide something more? If people know it's automatic, they're less enclined to assume the driver will stop; There is also less risk that the computer-driver is at fault; and last but not least, the video of the accident could be tweeted immediately so everyone is convinced that the biker/pedestrian/car is at fault. As opposed to human drivers, who are more reluctant to be filmed because it invades their privacy.

[negativeview]

All of those things are logical and make sense, but are unproven. Politicians are notoriously risk adverse when it comes to those kinds of risks.

[lucaspiller]

My comment was more aimed separate railways - what you have sounds more like a tram. Here they are building a new tramline, and there has already been a collision with a car before it even opened :D