realistically, do you really think a semi would handle better at high speed than a car?
I dont think most drivers could.
Doubly so seeing as most drivers drive auto's these days. They dont know about accelerating from 80 to 150 KPH, what gear they should be in or how to deal with wheelspin at those speeds.
Also I highly doubt a 100KW corolla could do 80-120 KPH fast enough. Especially if it's an automatic.
When it comes to breaking the speed limit or being run over by a semi, I'll break the speed limit every time.
To what advantage if the semi is also being driven far above the speed limit?
Realistically, what are your chances of actually keeping pace with the thing or out-running it without losing control of your own vehicle?
My chances of outpacing a semi in my Nissan 200sx are quite high as I race professionally. However this would be on a clear road with controlled entry points, I know my chances of hitting another object in front of me in traffic are higher than a hippy on the third day of an open air festival.
The correct procedure is to attempt to get out of the way. Because everyone checks their mirrors you should be able to spot it a mile away and because everyone drives in the inside lane they can drive onto the shoulder*.
You've got more chance of winning the lottery twice than being on the receiving end of a runaway semi.
You however have a real risk of being hit by a driver who doesn't keep a safe distance, changes lanes without checking, speeds or is drunk this evening as you drive home. The irony is that they think they're a good driver as they speed, lane hop and tailgate (the Dunning-Kruger effect or as Bertrand Russell put it "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.").
*I'm not sure if some people can detect the sarcasm.
And yet the feminists keep shrieking that ALL men are pigs, that ALL men are rapists or rape apologists, ALL men are oppressors.
So you think that these women should be silenced?
Maybe they should even be restricted from leaving the kitchen?
Jokes aside, if you think these views are the majority or even accepted by most women your head is so far up your arse you've been able to insert it into your colon twice.
The thing is, there are a lot of people like you who love to have a good whinge about issues that dont actually affect you. The media knows this and loves to give airtime to extremists, it's like intervening the KKK to give a balanced view of America. Only idiots believe it.
Yet to see the widescale oppression of men, doubt I will within my lifetime, not even within the lifetime of my grandkids when they're born in 20 or so years. Your rant is a pointless attempt at poisoning the well, by attempting to radicalise the discussion you only demonstrate your complete lack of attachment to reality.
Perhaps Adam Savage and his ilk should try meeting an actual woman once in their lives.
I would recommend you go out and meet real women for once in your life... but I think of all the women I have as friends and I'm not enough of a cunt to subject them to the likes of you.
I'm sure all this overbearing political correctness that tortures you
I've found the cries of "Political Correctness" to be the modern day equivalent of "think of the children".
It's a thought-terminating cliche used to prevent rational people from calling out obviously racist/sexist/xenophobic rants in the same way "think of the children" is used to silence criticism of overbearing laws, ideas or organisations.
The cry of oppressive political correctness is most often used ironically by those who want to force others into their own form of orthodoxy. These people dont want a free exchange of ideas, they want an echo chamber for their own.
No, for the same reason why a news article that talks about a white supremacist assaulting a African-American isn't automatically racist. Or one about Westboro Baptist Church picketing a funeral of someone who was gay doesn't make it automatically homophobic. The context of the whole article is what makes it misogynistic (or racist, or homophobic, or...)
This, discussing the issue of crime or alcoholism in Aboriginal communities is very different to saying "all them fucking boongs are drunks and thieves".
Intent is everything and intent is often only determined by context.
Any modified car wont be allowed on the autonomous lanes at all. Getting caught operating a modified car on the 'no human operator' sections will induce heavy fines, loss of use of private vehicle, etc.. In short no, your cyberpunk dreams arent going to happen. The whole point of autonomous cars is to remove human-drive ability altogether.
LoL.
There will be a long time before there's a no-human operator lane.
And you demonstrate you dont know much about people or modding cars. Do you think if carriers blocked all Iphones that have been modded by their owners that these mods will go away, hell no, they'll just find a way to hide it by finding the correct response to the carrier and for a long time laws are going to require people to sit in the drivers seat for driverless cars.
Beyond this, there are a lot of places that ban or restrict car mods already, it hasn't stopped it one iota. I have a modified car (springs, BOV and aftermarket tail lights), the original parts are in my garage. If I get pulled over (the Blow Off Valve is a legal grey area) and pulled for it, I'll just put the originals back on before I take it over the pits (for inspection). This is the standard operating procedure for modders in Oz.
As long as people have a desire to go faster, there will be a demand for modifications (legal or otherwise). Doubly so if they find a way to give priority to certain autonomous cars.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. It is 100% the fault of the person making an unsafe lane change if there is an accident, NOT the person who was driving too slow for your taste. You still have not given a single legitimate reason why low speed limits (by themselves), or slow drivers (by themselves) are dangerous.
This. I wish I had mod points.
It isn't speed that causes crashes (speed cause fatalities in the event of crashes, it's an important distinction that people miss) what commonly causes crashes at highway speeds is speed differential (see: Solomon Curve). A person travelling significant above or below the speed limit is more likely to be involved in a collision. The more people travel at the same speed, the less the risk of a collision. Speed limits are designed to just this, they should really be called speed targets on highways.
So the twats doing 20 KPH (~15MPH) over because they think it safe are actually making it worse for everyone.... same for the person in the beige Camry doing 20 under.
BTW, I'm a proponent for higher freeway/highway speed limits in Australia (I'd like 130-140 KPH) but I wouldn't call our current limits (100-110 depending on state) dangerously low. The only coherent argument is that you spend more time on the road at 110 KPH than you would at 130 KPH, in Australia with it's vast distances this is a problem with drivers who dont manage fatigue but not in the US with barely 100 miles between towns, so I'd say there's a benefit for us in higher limits, not a danger in low ones.
Like speed limits it will drive how it supposed to depending on the road it is on. When the road switches from LH to RH it will change just like it does when the speed limit goes from 65 to 50. Rules are loaded with the map.
I'm more concerned with how it will handle changing conditions.
Google's driverless cars are great when tested in sunny, clement California but in London it rains, it sleets, it snows and for a few special days of the year, there is sunshine. So how will a driverless car know that the roads are wet or icy before a loss of traction occurs. You cant rely on weather updates because they're unreliable and roads remain wet and slippery for some time after it rains. Beyond this you have differences in surfaces and again, you cant rely on reports because surface conditions degrade (or every now and then get resurfaced and upgraded) or what happens when the council puts in a new set of lights or stop signs without updating the Google map?.
I'm not worried about cars slightly exceeding the speed limit when needed, I figured out long ago that putting a hard limit on driverless cars was an accident waiting to happen and I'm sure if I could figure out a soft limit was a good idea someone at Google could too but I'm curious as to how they determine different conditions.
Yes it is. It's funny how most of this thread is centered on "idiot looters", when there is a real possibility that someone grabbed a whole bunch of Ebola patients for the purpose of weaponizing it.
If that's a real possibility (its not) then it's not a plausible threat.
Ebola isn't a disease you can drop into the water supply, infect food with or put into gas canisters. It's basically blood borne so to get infected you need direct contact with bodily fluids (because Ebola causes excessive bleeding just about any bodily fluid will contain blood) and skin contact on it's own isn't enough. So weaponising it means either dropping infected courses en mass or direct injection of Ebola into the victims.
However the real reason why that's complete and utter bollocks is the fact that the patients are believed to have walked out of their own accord. The looters were likely after drugs (which are not cheap in Liberia).
Do you really believe that a culture/tribe/village/group can develop such stupid rituals to deal with the dead and diseased and survive to this day? Do you really think that `primitive' people don't know anything about quarantaine or other measures against infectious diseases? Do you really think that a group of people that has just seen some of their own die in a horrible way will quietly slink off to meditate on their sins rather than seek (quite possibly rough) justice for this? But you're not one of the RFSP, right?
If they remain isolated enough, yes.
A lot of tribes that remain isolated in Africa and even South America this day and age. They aren't exposed to a lot of diseases that we carry.
Beyond this, because formal education is limited or non-existent in parts of Africa like Liberia a lot of them end up getting their education from lay preachers (Islam and Christianity are the biggest offenders). This would likely be the real story you're looking for. A preacher will have said that the plague is a curse from god and it's being spread by the godless foreign doctors (because the doctors follow the disease but precede the deaths, it's easy to sell this). Lack of education combined with religious fervor and the fear that accompanies an outbreak of a deadly disease and even people who are ordinarily rational and intelligent will do stupid things.
It's probably going to get worse too before the outbreak burns itself out.
Paid forum accounts are a surefire way to attract corruption, and even if they don't, the spectre of it is always there - that the bans being issued may not be done for a reason, but to make money for the site's operator.
And in the end, that's what people who are willing to pay to control trolls want.
What they're after is a forum where ideas are controlled so they are not exposed to any ideas, notions and especially not facts that contradict their point of view. Fox News is a prime example, people pay to be told lies they like (well the entirety of prostitution in SE Asia is proof of this being insanely profitable, the 19 yr old Thai girl says I'm handsome... where did I leave that Baht).
There are a heap of markets where people dont want to be exposed to ideas they find distasteful or challenging. Anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers, homeschoolers, both ends of the political spectrum. They're willing to put up with corruption in order to be "protected".
I get the impression you find the idea of such controls distasteful (dictatorial and oppressive), I do too but people can do what they want.
I agree. I've made a few Slashdot posts that were contrary to the majority view, but meant in good faith and with the goal of advancing the discussion, which ended being modded as Trolls. Fortunately this happens to me rarely, suggesting that only a small fraction of moderators
Almost all of my +5 posts have a small percentage of -1 mods (Troll, Overrated, Flamebait, Off Topic). I consider this to be a good thing as Winston Chirchill once uttered "you have enemies, good. It means you've stood up for something in your life". It also means they wasted a mod point.
I've also noticed a somewhat shifting pattern where all the Apple fanboys get modpoints at once. There are times where saying anything slightly critical of Apple gets you modded down into oblivion (it doesn't happen often, I've survived with excellent karma).
There are ofcourse the obvious trolls, but where does someone end being a troll, and is just someone who has a completely different view?
This.
I have been called a troll many times for simply expunging a different view or worse yet, presenting evidence that contradicts their biases/preconceptions. Just check my moderation history, almost every +5 insightful comment has a small percentage of Troll and Overrated mods... Just check anyone's post history on./, if they have a history of +5 comments they'll have the same thing. That being said, I think/. has one of the best moderation systems on the interwebs, not perfect but still pretty damn good.
Paying for websites that control the "trolls" is simply asking for a site where your biases and ideas and preconceptions will never be challenged. OK, its a free country/interwebs, people will pay for sites like that. Fox News still has millions of subscribers is evidence enough of this. I actually think paywalling them off is a good thing.
As someone who has used both iOS and Android devices I thought all the screenshots looked like an Android device. I wouldn't of been confused at all. Is someone *trying* to manufacture a controversy?
Because IOS7 looks so much like Android 4 that people are getting confused.
I'm using an iPhone 4s, it's still pretty awesome and still being actively sold and supported. Release date late 2011.
OTOH, Nexus 3 users, release date late 2011, no longer supported.
Thats because there was no Nexus 3.
There was the Nexus One, Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4 and Nexus 5.
And my 2011 Galaxy Nexus still does things the latest Iphone doesn't. I just want a phone that does what I want it to, not what the manufacturer wants me to.
Autonomous cars will be slaves, they wont be making choices for themselves. They will follow the ruleset the Road Computer sets for them. Cars will be in constant contact with the road with beacons giving them differing rulesets (speed, school nearby etc). No person is going to have selectable ethics.
Because no-one will hack or mod their car?
5 minutes before autonomous cars become mainstream after-market CPU's and software will be available. Besides this, autonomous cars will have manual controls for a long time, selectable ethics just means taking the wheel.
All of that said, I would love for you to have it 100% correct, because I fucking loathe insurance companies
poorly maintained vehicles (which will be mostly resolved when EVs are mainstream anyway).
EV's still have bad tyres, brake pads, callipers, rotors, wheels, CV Joints, suspension, drive trains and so forth. Very few accidents are a caused by bad engines. The saying that EV's only have one moving part is a misnomer, they have one moving part in the engine, the most of the car is still the same as an ICE powered version.
Bad tyres (bald and/or low quality) and brakes (worn pads/rotors) are the biggest cause of accidents outside of driver error. Inside of driver error they help to make it worse. So todays Top Tip, dont cheap out on tyres and brakes.
Considering that Citibank is part of the gang of big US banks directly responsible for the Global Financial Crisis through their dodgy practices and considering they are just as bad as the big 4 when it comes to doing evil crap, I wouldn't go with them either.
To be fair, if anyone but Citibank offered a similar product I'd jump ship.
But I do a lot of transactions overseas and Citbank are the only one with no conversion fees what so ever.
Slashdot Mirror
...I find the concept of "German intelligence" an oxymoron.
What's contradictory about it? It's German Intelligence, not German Humour.
so you're saying there is no governance system in heaven? that makes no sense.
Obviously the Kingdom of Heaven is an absolute monarchy.
My will is going to come with a copy of DBAN with explicit instructions to format all of my hard drives.
That could only work in a city where the police don't enforce laws against obstructing traffic.
You mean all of them?
I dont think most drivers could.
Doubly so seeing as most drivers drive auto's these days. They dont know about accelerating from 80 to 150 KPH, what gear they should be in or how to deal with wheelspin at those speeds.
Also I highly doubt a 100KW corolla could do 80-120 KPH fast enough. Especially if it's an automatic.
As for you Mr AC, I am almost certain you cant.
When it comes to breaking the speed limit or being run over by a semi, I'll break the speed limit every time.
To what advantage if the semi is also being driven far above the speed limit?
Realistically, what are your chances of actually keeping pace with the thing or out-running it without losing control of your own vehicle?
My chances of outpacing a semi in my Nissan 200sx are quite high as I race professionally. However this would be on a clear road with controlled entry points, I know my chances of hitting another object in front of me in traffic are higher than a hippy on the third day of an open air festival.
The correct procedure is to attempt to get out of the way. Because everyone checks their mirrors you should be able to spot it a mile away and because everyone drives in the inside lane they can drive onto the shoulder*.
You've got more chance of winning the lottery twice than being on the receiving end of a runaway semi.
You however have a real risk of being hit by a driver who doesn't keep a safe distance, changes lanes without checking, speeds or is drunk this evening as you drive home. The irony is that they think they're a good driver as they speed, lane hop and tailgate (the Dunning-Kruger effect or as Bertrand Russell put it "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."). *I'm not sure if some people can detect the sarcasm.
So you think that these women should be silenced?
Maybe they should even be restricted from leaving the kitchen?
Jokes aside, if you think these views are the majority or even accepted by most women your head is so far up your arse you've been able to insert it into your colon twice.
The thing is, there are a lot of people like you who love to have a good whinge about issues that dont actually affect you. The media knows this and loves to give airtime to extremists, it's like intervening the KKK to give a balanced view of America. Only idiots believe it.
Yet to see the widescale oppression of men, doubt I will within my lifetime, not even within the lifetime of my grandkids when they're born in 20 or so years. Your rant is a pointless attempt at poisoning the well, by attempting to radicalise the discussion you only demonstrate your complete lack of attachment to reality.
I would recommend you go out and meet real women for once in your life... but I think of all the women I have as friends and I'm not enough of a cunt to subject them to the likes of you.
I'm sure all this overbearing political correctness that tortures you
I've found the cries of "Political Correctness" to be the modern day equivalent of "think of the children".
It's a thought-terminating cliche used to prevent rational people from calling out obviously racist/sexist/xenophobic rants in the same way "think of the children" is used to silence criticism of overbearing laws, ideas or organisations.
The cry of oppressive political correctness is most often used ironically by those who want to force others into their own form of orthodoxy. These people dont want a free exchange of ideas, they want an echo chamber for their own.
Has it really been that long since we've seen a GNAA post?
This.
Rationalism is the enemy of intolerance in all its forms.
No, for the same reason why a news article that talks about a white supremacist assaulting a African-American isn't automatically racist. Or one about Westboro Baptist Church picketing a funeral of someone who was gay doesn't make it automatically homophobic. The context of the whole article is what makes it misogynistic (or racist, or homophobic, or ...)
This, discussing the issue of crime or alcoholism in Aboriginal communities is very different to saying "all them fucking boongs are drunks and thieves".
Intent is everything and intent is often only determined by context.
Any modified car wont be allowed on the autonomous lanes at all. Getting caught operating a modified car on the 'no human operator' sections will induce heavy fines, loss of use of private vehicle, etc.. In short no, your cyberpunk dreams arent going to happen. The whole point of autonomous cars is to remove human-drive ability altogether.
LoL.
There will be a long time before there's a no-human operator lane.
And you demonstrate you dont know much about people or modding cars. Do you think if carriers blocked all Iphones that have been modded by their owners that these mods will go away, hell no, they'll just find a way to hide it by finding the correct response to the carrier and for a long time laws are going to require people to sit in the drivers seat for driverless cars.
Beyond this, there are a lot of places that ban or restrict car mods already, it hasn't stopped it one iota. I have a modified car (springs, BOV and aftermarket tail lights), the original parts are in my garage. If I get pulled over (the Blow Off Valve is a legal grey area) and pulled for it, I'll just put the originals back on before I take it over the pits (for inspection). This is the standard operating procedure for modders in Oz.
As long as people have a desire to go faster, there will be a demand for modifications (legal or otherwise). Doubly so if they find a way to give priority to certain autonomous cars.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. It is 100% the fault of the person making an unsafe lane change if there is an accident, NOT the person who was driving too slow for your taste. You still have not given a single legitimate reason why low speed limits (by themselves), or slow drivers (by themselves) are dangerous.
This. I wish I had mod points.
It isn't speed that causes crashes (speed cause fatalities in the event of crashes, it's an important distinction that people miss) what commonly causes crashes at highway speeds is speed differential (see: Solomon Curve). A person travelling significant above or below the speed limit is more likely to be involved in a collision. The more people travel at the same speed, the less the risk of a collision. Speed limits are designed to just this, they should really be called speed targets on highways.
So the twats doing 20 KPH (~15MPH) over because they think it safe are actually making it worse for everyone.... same for the person in the beige Camry doing 20 under.
BTW, I'm a proponent for higher freeway/highway speed limits in Australia (I'd like 130-140 KPH) but I wouldn't call our current limits (100-110 depending on state) dangerously low. The only coherent argument is that you spend more time on the road at 110 KPH than you would at 130 KPH, in Australia with it's vast distances this is a problem with drivers who dont manage fatigue but not in the US with barely 100 miles between towns, so I'd say there's a benefit for us in higher limits, not a danger in low ones.
Like speed limits it will drive how it supposed to depending on the road it is on. When the road switches from LH to RH it will change just like it does when the speed limit goes from 65 to 50. Rules are loaded with the map.
I'm more concerned with how it will handle changing conditions.
Google's driverless cars are great when tested in sunny, clement California but in London it rains, it sleets, it snows and for a few special days of the year, there is sunshine. So how will a driverless car know that the roads are wet or icy before a loss of traction occurs. You cant rely on weather updates because they're unreliable and roads remain wet and slippery for some time after it rains. Beyond this you have differences in surfaces and again, you cant rely on reports because surface conditions degrade (or every now and then get resurfaced and upgraded) or what happens when the council puts in a new set of lights or stop signs without updating the Google map?.
I'm not worried about cars slightly exceeding the speed limit when needed, I figured out long ago that putting a hard limit on driverless cars was an accident waiting to happen and I'm sure if I could figure out a soft limit was a good idea someone at Google could too but I'm curious as to how they determine different conditions.
Yes it is. It's funny how most of this thread is centered on "idiot looters", when there is a real possibility that someone grabbed a whole bunch of Ebola patients for the purpose of weaponizing it.
If that's a real possibility (its not) then it's not a plausible threat.
Ebola isn't a disease you can drop into the water supply, infect food with or put into gas canisters. It's basically blood borne so to get infected you need direct contact with bodily fluids (because Ebola causes excessive bleeding just about any bodily fluid will contain blood) and skin contact on it's own isn't enough. So weaponising it means either dropping infected courses en mass or direct injection of Ebola into the victims.
However the real reason why that's complete and utter bollocks is the fact that the patients are believed to have walked out of their own accord. The looters were likely after drugs (which are not cheap in Liberia).
Do you really believe that a culture/tribe/village/group can develop such stupid rituals to deal with the dead and diseased and survive to this day? Do you really think that `primitive' people don't know anything about quarantaine or other measures against infectious diseases? Do you really think that a group of people that has just seen some of their own die in a horrible way will quietly slink off to meditate on their sins rather than seek (quite possibly rough) justice for this? But you're not one of the RFSP, right?
If they remain isolated enough, yes.
A lot of tribes that remain isolated in Africa and even South America this day and age. They aren't exposed to a lot of diseases that we carry.
Beyond this, because formal education is limited or non-existent in parts of Africa like Liberia a lot of them end up getting their education from lay preachers (Islam and Christianity are the biggest offenders). This would likely be the real story you're looking for. A preacher will have said that the plague is a curse from god and it's being spread by the godless foreign doctors (because the doctors follow the disease but precede the deaths, it's easy to sell this). Lack of education combined with religious fervor and the fear that accompanies an outbreak of a deadly disease and even people who are ordinarily rational and intelligent will do stupid things.
It's probably going to get worse too before the outbreak burns itself out.
Paid forum accounts are a surefire way to attract corruption, and even if they don't, the spectre of it is always there - that the bans being issued may not be done for a reason, but to make money for the site's operator.
And in the end, that's what people who are willing to pay to control trolls want.
What they're after is a forum where ideas are controlled so they are not exposed to any ideas, notions and especially not facts that contradict their point of view. Fox News is a prime example, people pay to be told lies they like (well the entirety of prostitution in SE Asia is proof of this being insanely profitable, the 19 yr old Thai girl says I'm handsome... where did I leave that Baht).
There are a heap of markets where people dont want to be exposed to ideas they find distasteful or challenging. Anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers, homeschoolers, both ends of the political spectrum. They're willing to put up with corruption in order to be "protected".
I get the impression you find the idea of such controls distasteful (dictatorial and oppressive), I do too but people can do what they want.
I agree. I've made a few Slashdot posts that were contrary to the majority view, but meant in good faith and with the goal of advancing the discussion, which ended being modded as Trolls. Fortunately this happens to me rarely, suggesting that only a small fraction of moderators
Almost all of my +5 posts have a small percentage of -1 mods (Troll, Overrated, Flamebait, Off Topic). I consider this to be a good thing as Winston Chirchill once uttered "you have enemies, good. It means you've stood up for something in your life". It also means they wasted a mod point.
I've also noticed a somewhat shifting pattern where all the Apple fanboys get modpoints at once. There are times where saying anything slightly critical of Apple gets you modded down into oblivion (it doesn't happen often, I've survived with excellent karma).
In my language, "Mui" = "Blowjobs".
Ahem...
Which language is that (it might come in handy one day).
There are ofcourse the obvious trolls, but where does someone end being a troll, and is just someone who has a completely different view?
This.
./, if they have a history of +5 comments they'll have the same thing. That being said, I think /. has one of the best moderation systems on the interwebs, not perfect but still pretty damn good.
I have been called a troll many times for simply expunging a different view or worse yet, presenting evidence that contradicts their biases/preconceptions. Just check my moderation history, almost every +5 insightful comment has a small percentage of Troll and Overrated mods... Just check anyone's post history on
Paying for websites that control the "trolls" is simply asking for a site where your biases and ideas and preconceptions will never be challenged. OK, its a free country/interwebs, people will pay for sites like that. Fox News still has millions of subscribers is evidence enough of this. I actually think paywalling them off is a good thing.
As someone who has used both iOS and Android devices I thought all the screenshots looked like an Android device. I wouldn't of been confused at all. Is someone *trying* to manufacture a controversy?
Because IOS7 looks so much like Android 4 that people are getting confused.
Tell me that's coincidence or not copying, and I say you're the one in drugs.
I'd ask for some of your drugs, but I've got to drive home.
If you think those are the same colour, you must be legally blind.
It's far closer to Android 4 than IOS7 (OK, to be fair, IOS7 ripped off so much from Android 4 that people get confused).
I'm using an iPhone 4s, it's still pretty awesome and still being actively sold and supported. Release date late 2011.
OTOH, Nexus 3 users, release date late 2011, no longer supported.
Thats because there was no Nexus 3.
There was the Nexus One, Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4 and Nexus 5.
And my 2011 Galaxy Nexus still does things the latest Iphone doesn't. I just want a phone that does what I want it to, not what the manufacturer wants me to.
Autonomous cars will be slaves, they wont be making choices for themselves. They will follow the ruleset the Road Computer sets for them. Cars will be in constant contact with the road with beacons giving them differing rulesets (speed, school nearby etc). No person is going to have selectable ethics.
Because no-one will hack or mod their car?
5 minutes before autonomous cars become mainstream after-market CPU's and software will be available. Besides this, autonomous cars will have manual controls for a long time, selectable ethics just means taking the wheel.
All of that said, I would love for you to have it 100% correct, because I fucking loathe insurance companies
poorly maintained vehicles (which will be mostly resolved when EVs are mainstream anyway).
EV's still have bad tyres, brake pads, callipers, rotors, wheels, CV Joints, suspension, drive trains and so forth. Very few accidents are a caused by bad engines. The saying that EV's only have one moving part is a misnomer, they have one moving part in the engine, the most of the car is still the same as an ICE powered version.
Bad tyres (bald and/or low quality) and brakes (worn pads/rotors) are the biggest cause of accidents outside of driver error. Inside of driver error they help to make it worse. So todays Top Tip, dont cheap out on tyres and brakes.
Considering that Citibank is part of the gang of big US banks directly responsible for the Global Financial Crisis through their dodgy practices and considering they are just as bad as the big 4 when it comes to doing evil crap, I wouldn't go with them either.
To be fair, if anyone but Citibank offered a similar product I'd jump ship.
But I do a lot of transactions overseas and Citbank are the only one with no conversion fees what so ever.