Most Drivers Would Hand Keys Over To Computer If It Meant Lower Insurance Rates

Lucas123 writes "Most drivers would consider buying an autonomous vehicle if it meant their insurance rates would be reduced by 80%, a new survey of 2,000 licensed drivers found. Oddly enough, the survey by the online consumer insurance site Car insurance.com also showed that 75% of respondents think they could drive a car better than a computer. Another 64% said computers were not capable of the same quality of decision-making as human drivers. And 75% would not trust a driverless car to take their children to school. The survey also asked what commuters would be doing if a computer handled the driving: More than one-in-four would text/talk with friends; 21% would read; 10% would sleep; 8% would watch movies; 7% would play games; and 7% would work. The rest of those surveyed said they'd just watch the scenery blow by."

Comments

Flagrant Flatulism Posing as Reporting

[Press2ToContinue]

If car auto-pilot is like auto-correct, we're all going to die in really funny ways. No matter what the results of this survey say.

Re:Flagrant Flatulism Posing as Reporting

[anagama]

I think I'm at best an average driver. Whole stretches of the road seem to disappear and all I can recall is the story I was listening to or the thing I was thinking about. Anyway, I hate driving and would jump at the chance to be a passenger.

Re: Flagrant Flatulism Posing as Reporting

[JanneM]

Once one car in ten or so is self-driving they'll act as pace cars and effectively force you to drive at the same speed and with the same care as they do. And since they keep detailed recordings of everything happening around them, you will get the blame for any incident if you tried to push the limits at the time.

And at that point, driving yourself has become a dull, monotonous exercize in boredom. So you might as well join the ranks of non-drivers as well.

I, for one.

[mcgrew]

Hell, I'd almost pay higher premiums for the computer to do the driving.

Computer vs human drivers

[c0d3g33k]

Another 64% said computers were not capable of the same quality of decision-making as human drivers.

That's right. Based on my observations of human drivers (not to mention traffic fatality statistics and the nightly "single vehicle accident" reports), the quality would consistently be better. Don't mod me funny, please. I'm not joking.

No, read that again.

[Valdrax]

You mean people will choose to save money while increasing their overall safety if statistically proven?

You seem to have missed the part in which most people were of the belief that they would be decreasing their overall safety in exchange for more money. That's what it means when 75% believe that they would be better drivers for their children than an autonomous car and yet 75% would still take the money.

At the most extreme disjoint of the two sets, that means that 50% of people believe that letting a car drive their children to school would put them at higher risk, and yet they'd do it anyway for money. At least 2/3 of all the people who said yes, and it's likely more because there have to be at least some people who think it would be safer and who wouldn't do it in spite of the money for other unknown reasons.

That's kind of horrifying, actually, regardless of what you think about auto-drive.

Re: people better than computers...

[ColaMan]

It's not just blindly following maps with GPS, you know.

*Nav system*: Ok, now turn left here to get onto the highway.

*Vehicle Guidance*: Um, when I look to the left, there's an obstuction in the way. It goes on for at least 4 or 5 car lengths. Could be a railing or a wall or something. I can't see an intersection anywhere?

*Nav system*: Shit. Keep going and I'll re-route. I'll beep and let the passenger know that something's up.

*Vehicle Guidance*: Fuck me, Nav system, you had ONE JOB. Now we have to deal with the passenger who's probably on Slashdot as we speak posting about his crappy self-driving car wanting to drive him off a bridge.