If an OEM comes out with a FSD car capable of driving intervention-free just on the interstate system and guaranteed to not cause an at-fault accident, it would be a game changer. Both in good ways (fewer vehicle deaths per mile traveled, reduced need for air travel) and bad (ability to commute 100 miles each way while working in the car during the commute).
And this goal objectively is not that far off.
I say this as someone who drives a Tesla regularly and would never trust my life to its current FSD technology.
Yeah he’s getting real fucking desperate. Co-hosting spaces with guys who run paid pump and dunp discord and/or paid “stock tip” newsletters isn’t a good sign.
In my Grandma’s neighborhood in Prairie Village, KS - the story is that developers deliberately made the roads all curvy and cattywumpus to keep them being expanded into a major street in the future.
Nah, all the swirly subdivision streets are a half-assed and somewhat misguided attempt to implement Frederick Law Olmstead’s ideas. It’s anti-urban, 19th century romanticism.
Weasel words. This person thinks we can just make self-driving cars automatically not liable for accidents and this fixes the problem. You also seem to think that… people should be forced to work in the car? Like is this whole thing just lawyers fighting over billable hours or some bullshit like that? “Vehicle deaths per mile traveled” just straight up sounds like you value machine “”""“life”"""" over human and are openly planning to unleash a lethal, defective product no matter what.
Edited to add: Incidentally, any law firm that bills you by the hour is lying to you. What lawyers (are supposed to) do can’t be measured in time increments in this way.
It’s probably true that improving the AI to the point of causing literally zero at-fault accidents (by any fairly judged metric) is impossible. However I think it’s highly likely that within the next 5 years it’ll be significant less likely than the average driver to cause one, and in 10 years will probably be an order of magnitude less likely to crash than the average driver.
That said, the bar is gonna have to be really high for widespread adoption of self-driving cars, of course, because people will have the same logical fallacies that cause them to be terrified of air travel but dgaf about driving hundreds of highway miles a week. Even if AI has a fraction of a percent of fatal crashes compared to human drivers, some people will fight tooth and nail to be the ones ‘in control of their own destiny’ and not have to face the perceived horror of being the one in a million passenger that has to sit and watch as their car drives into something.
yawn, you’re laying down the moral indignation card over and over, got it
Given that I said the potential for 100 mile commutes with the person working while driving is a bad thing, yet you say this is something I’m arguing in favor of, shows that you’ve got nothing more to contribute to a conversation about self driving cars.
I was a Luddite too for a while—at age 15. A good part of my life while I could make it last.
“the potential for 100 mile commutes with the person working while driving is a bad thing”
You’re just moving the weasel words to a different place in the argument. Like are you cool with 99 mile commutes with the person working? Should any of this work be mandatory in your view?
