• ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The question isn’t “are they safer than the average human driver?”

    How is that not the question? That absolutely is the question. Just because someone is accountable for your death doesn’t mean you aren’t already dead, it doesn’t bring you back to life. If a human driver is actively dangerous and get taken off the road or put in jail, there are very likely already plenty more taking that human drivers place. Plus genuine accidents, even horrific ones, do happen with human drivers. If the death rate for self-driving vehicles is really that much lower, you are risking your life that much more by trusting in human drivers.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah that person’s take seems a little unhinged as throwing people in prison after a car accident only happens if they’re intoxicated or driving recklessly. These systems don’t have to be perfect to save lives. They just have to be better than the average driver.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Hell, let’s put the threshold at “better than 99% of drivers”, because every driver I know thinks they are better than average.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Exactly.

      We should solve the accountability problem, but the metric should be lives and accidents. If the self-driving system proves it causes fewer accidents and kills fewer people, it should be preferred. Full stop.

      Throwing someone in jail may be cathartic, but the goal is fewer issues on the road, not more people in jail.