by hagfish » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:46 am
This is also playing out closer to the ground. At present in New Zealand, roughly one person per day is killed on our roads. A number maybe 10x that is scarred/disabled for life. Evidently, we are cool with that. The advantages high-speed motorised vehicles far outweigh the costs.
As fully-autonomous vehicles enter the mix, their safety rate will have to be at least 1000x as high as that of human drivers, or we'll kick them to the kerb. My question is, would you rather take the much-reduced risk of being a (helpless) passenger in an autonomous vehicle, or would you prefer to have a human at the wheel, 'just in case'? In those occasions when my car is being chased by a tsunami, I'd prefer to be able to put my foot down. Those occasions are rare.
WIth the (looming, inevitable) reduction in the speed limits for urban roads, and country roads with no median barrier, human drivers will have a much easier time of it, and so will autonomous vehicles. EVs will magically get lots of extra range if they only have to punt along at 80Km/hr. Maybe we'll decide en masse that crawling along at 80 is no fun, and getting an autonomous taxi is cheaper, safer and more convenient. As a 'bloke' - of course - I reckon I drive better than the average person. I try to drive defensively-enough to mitigate other drivers' mistakes. But I concede that a well-crafted machine would be much 'better' (ie safer, more economical, smoother) in almost every situation. I'd rather take a back seat.
When it comes to aircraft, this reverses. Pilots don't have to deal with 'other idiots' - they contend with mechanical failures and the weather - the two things that can wreak havoc with automated systems. I'll take my chances with the guy in the short-sleeved shirt and the aviators.