Quote:
Originally Posted by IK6SPEED
At some point, your precious program has to go live in the real world after testing.
You refuse to admit that coding will determine what the car does in an emergency. Either A) Protect Occupant or B) Protect Others instead of occupant. Most times A and B are mutually exclusive.
You keep obfuscating the fact I acknowledged from the first post I noted that either the technology failed or was coded for A) Protect Occupant if other person violates law and have stated in over a half dozen posts.
Autonomous cars can and will prevent accidents better than humans. I saw 2 wrecks yesterday alone because human was distracted by smartphones.
You are proposing a double standard. Autonomous vehicles MUST drive safer than humans. That law does not exist as it is a double standard.
Then again, why not have multiple standards? Perhaps on license renewal everyone is given a road test and graded. If examiner gives you 100% you get full license. 90% - 99% you cannot drive at night. 80% - 89% you cannot have passengers.
Sounds ridiculous. But that is exactly what you are proposing. Different standards for different drivers.
On the other hand, in 10 years should any human who cannot drive as well as an autonomous car be banned from driving?
Again, double standards.
Be careful what you ask for.
But bottom line, every post I have made on this was on the legality.
And you have posted nothing that can be construed in any legal sense where the victim was not at fault for violation of Arizona State Law.
|
I'm proposing we drop the idea of autonomous vehicles. I'm not proposing a double anything. I STATED the proponents of autonomous vehicles state their technology will drive better than humans; I did not propose there be a law stating such, that's your idea.
I'm all for graduated licenses and merit-based driving restrictions. Again, your idea to ban people from driving, not me.
Can't wait for the day when an AV decides to run over legally crossing pedestrians in a cross walk because it was "coded" to protect the occupants in itself rather than the non occupants in front of it. Lol