> Also, construction absolutely needs to evolve convergently with self driving. Cones are... ok, but some of those people leaning on shovels need to update systems with information on what is being worked on and what is cordoned off.

No. If the car cannot handle random obstructions and diversions without external data, it cannot be allowed on the road.

Construction is often enough planned ahead of time, but crashes happen, will continue to happen, and if a SDC can't handle being routed around a crash scene without someone having updated some cloud somewhere, it shouldn't be allowed to drive.

First responders need to deal with the accident, not be focused on uploading details of the routing around the crash before they can trust other cars to not blindly drive into the crash scene because it was stationary and not on a map.

And if you can handle that on-car, which I consider a hard requirement, then why not simply use that logic for all the cases involving detours and lane closures?

Then broadcast an alert on a status channel that the AI can take into account. They're going to do it anyway for traffic and other hazards.

Doing so ahead of time for planned construction is not a big ask.

"And if you can handle that on-car, which I consider a hard requirement, then why not simply use that logic for all the cases involving detours and lane closures?"

You're making the same mistake Musk made when insisting that the car be able to navigate regardless of location or connectivity. Ignoring the ability of networking/radio broadcast/internet databases to provide vastly more deep information pools is a big mistake.