On 07/14/2016 02:38 PM, Jim Birch wrote:
On 14 July 2016 at 13:50, Brendan <[email protected]> wrote:
Presumably, driverless cars are going to disproportionately remove drunks,
suicides and young men from the accident statistics.
That's true, but those drivers often hit other random people too. And
people who aren't in the highest risk categories also have accidents and
also kill and injure other people. The trolley problem is only a problem
while accidents are occurring. Most accidents wouldn't occur if drivers
drove appropriately and remained alert. If you're trying to scrape out of
an accident situation with minimum carnage you have already failed.
It seems to me that a near-zero RTA rate is possible in the medium term.
Robotic driving systems can be continuously improved; we can't be improved
that much, have fickle attention and resent being told what to do. I
imagine that in 50 years or so, people will look back on our road systems
with as we look on the open drains of early industrial cities, a crazy
destructive waste with an obvious solution.
I'm just saying a lower overall rate of injury/fatality isn't the only
issue to be considered.
If the improvement was marginal, then I would guess it would be preferable for
high risk groups to use driverless cars, but other groups not to.
If the improvement was overwhelming, that's a different story.
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
