it can also end your life or another driver's or pedestrian's life; slamming the brakes on is how a tesla model s caused an 8-car pileup on the bay bridge a couple of months ago, though astoundingly that somehow failed to kill anybody

https://jalopnik.com/tesla-fsd-causes-8-car-pile-up-on-sf-ba...

generally speaking individual people are better at choosing risk tradeoffs than governments are, both because they know more about their own situations and because their incentives are better aligned

this is why liberal societies are not only much wealthier but also have much higher life expectancy than authoritarian societies. but governments aren't magic; they're just organizations with great unaccountable power, a somewhat more extreme version of any large corporation. we shouldn't entrust ford or tesla with the ability to kill with impunity any more than we should entrust the fbi with it

> it can also end your life or another driver's or pedestrian's life; slamming the brakes on is how a tesla model s caused an 8-car pileup on the bay bridge a couple of months ago

Come one... I thought I was on a scientifically-minded website. That's not how things work. It's like saying seatbelts are bad because they sometimes trap people in burning cars. Yeah, that's true, but it happens orders of magnitude less than crashing and splattering your brains across the highway if you aren't wearing one. That's the point x)

> but it happens orders of magnitude less than crashing and splattering your brains across the highway if you aren't wearing one. That's the point x)

So you went on a sci-minded website just for claiming unproved statements (seatbelt point is proved though)?

> this is why liberal societies are not only much wealthier but also have much higher life expectancy than authoritarian societies

Worth noting this is referring to classic liberalism where individual rights and freedoms are a top property, not modern liberalism where universal rights are protected by larger governments and laws that limit individual freedoms in the name of the greater good

yeah, i meant real liberalism

Until there is a weird reflection on the road and you get rear-ended to death by the Ford 750 tailgating you at 125mph in the right-most lane.

It's an empirical question what the ratio of false positives to true positives is. If the ratio is 1 to 10000, for example, I think that's tolerable and a net positive. You also have to account for humans making similar mistakes.

But humans aren't always logical. Especially when it comes to low probability events that have a high impact if they do occur. Like plane crashes, or to a lesser degree car crashes.

Yeah but in this case, the impact is the same whether you die from human error or automation error. I would rather reduce the overall probability of death by 50% even if death by malfunctioning equipment goes up by 1%.