Slashdot Mirror
Google's Driverless Car and the Logic of Safety
mikejuk writes "Google's driverless car could save more than 1 million deaths per year and tens of millions of injuries. It is an impressive achievement, but will we allow it to take over the wheel? Sebastian Thrun puts the case for it in a persuasive TED Talk video. However it may be OK for human drivers to kill millions of people each year but one human fatality might be enough to finish the driverless car project — in fact it might not even take a death as an injury might cause the same backlash. Robot drivers might kill far fewer people than a human driver but it remains to be seen if we can be logical enough to accept the occasional failure of algorithm or hardware. Put simply we might have all seen too many 'evil robot' movies."
"save more than 1 million deaths per year"
Wouldn't it be much better to save 1 million LIVES per year?
I just threw up in my mouth a little. But then I imagined Microsoft's response:
You have successfully changed your radio station.
You must restart your car for the changes to take effect.
Do you want to restart your car now?
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
The iCar will have two settings: Destination and an option of "Get me there as soon as possible" or "I want to enjoy the sights".
The competitor will have an option for "GT mode", "Super Sport", "Cruise launch", "Eco-boost" and "Rally" that no one understands.
Quick we need a car analogy... oh wait...
At least let me cause my own death, or be in control of avoiding getting hit by a drunk driver so it's at least my own fault!
Are you the guy who apologized to Dick Cheney after he shot you in the face? Man, you have some serious self esteem issues.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.