[polak]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This post is essentially the definition of Hubris.

Me saying that people won't like it if their cars start killing them is hubris? I offered my take on the situation and compared it to the fear of flying. That makes me arrogant?

Originally Posted by MattyC

What's the difference between this and someone heading to a Toyota dealer after the accidents? Or buy Firestone tires. Or basically relying on anything that has malfunctioned in the past?

Some people won't just because that's how they are. Just like some people won't fly, even though it is vastly safer than any other form of transportation. They aren't in control, and people generally don't like that. But don't confuse that feeling with the idea that because you are in control, you and everyone else is safer. It's not necessarily the case.

But the thing I'm trying to get at is that Self Driving cars will be an alternative to the status quo. You won't need to buy a self driving car at first. In fact, they will most likely cost a premium over normal cars. All I'm saying is that their track record better be damn near perfect. Do you think Toyota would've survived that recall if it had happened in their first year or two of existence? I doubt it.

Originally Posted by MattyC

Just like anything else, anyone who existed before implementation will have to adjust. It will be innate to anyone born into it (thinka bout how we work video game systems compared to our parents. It's ingrained in us. I could pick up a game controller for a system I've never used and figure it out, whereas my dad almost through my PS3 out the window trying to play a movie on it.).

People died believing the world was flat, even when we knew it was round. As soon as you block yourself to new information, you're automatically removed from our evolution. And our technology is driving our evolution.

I'm not going to be fighting some fight against self driving cars. If they work fine than I'll probably buy one just like everyone else, even though I like driving. I also agree that if they make it past the transition phase then they will be a permanent fixture. It's just that I think that transition period will be a lot more fragile than a lot of you seem to think. I just think it's not "inevitable" that this takes off. Think about all of the other inventions that you'd think would take off like wild fire but didn't. Electric cars are still struggling, Segway is a complete joke, I also suggest reading about The Fiske Reading Machine. Lots of apparently good ideas simply don't catch on for a number of reasons.

Originally Posted by jammies

Sorry, that whole scenarios is so outlandishly remote as to be essentially not an issue at all. I doubt that in all the history of the motor vehicle that anyone has ever faced the choice between two different sets of people, one of which must inevitably be killed to save the other. Further, even if it did happen, cars won't "think" like a human so their won't even be any kind of choice involved, it'll just go along a tree of decisions that will end at "slow the vehicle as much as possible before impact with the smallest object among those you must hit", which I guess'll mean Jimmy and Nancy get plowed over.

If you're going to come up with situations where people get killed, look at things more like stupid teenagers playing matador in automated traffic and deliberately trying to cause issues. Dealing with dumb or malicious humans, that's what really stresses automated systems.

Outlandishly remote? Are you saying people don't get hit by cars? People commit suicide by cars for godsake. If you plan on replacing every single car in the world with a self driving version than I think it'll be a situation that plays out on a daily basis some where in the world.

Your second point is exactly what I'm talking about. How will you compensate for that?