Re:California suspends GM Cruise's autonomous vehicle deploy...
by hnbad on Wednesday October 25, 2023 @03:53AM
(#38010345)
I think the better question is why we try to replace cars 1 to 1, even if it is in terms of mileage rather than number of vehicles. The problem isn't just drivers, the problem is cars. For most trips there are superior technological alternatives, there's just no political motivation to implement them because infrastructure is boring and it's easier to justify throwing more money at roads in the short term than investing in long term urban renewal projects to build and expand tram networks, underground transit, dedicated bus lanes and bicycle-first road networks. Especially now that the idea of "walkable neighborhoods" has cynically become a culture war issue rather than something that's objectively improving quality of life while reducing emissions and resource waste.
Re:California suspends GM Cruise's autonomous vehicle deploy...
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday October 25, 2023 @05:36AM
(#38010988)
I like reducing car use too, but that's not what autonomous driving tech in particular is useful for.
Also I expect that a single autonomous taxi can replace more than one private car.
> That seems like a comically bad baseline.
Now consider a version of autonomous cars that would kill 20k.
The argument to switch to those cars, to save 10k lives a year, has to use 30k as a baseline.
If we don't use 30k as a baseline, then we end up saying "20k is too many, stick with the status quo", and then more people die.