[entee]

I'm not sure what you're arguing in terms of acceptable risk. Biotech is incredibly regulated, specifically because the risks are so high, effectively there is very little acceptable risk. In biotech, a patient dying due to your drug is a Big Problem that will at best cause you to put a disclaimer on the package (see Black Box Warning) and at worst immediately end your drug's prospects. We can argue about trade-offs (if you've got terminal cancer, maybe a rare heart event is a worthwhile risk, probably less so if you have a rash), but this is exactly the way it should be.

Self driving cars are a nice luxury, especially in city driving, not something that radically improves our world. You get to read your phone instead of paying attention, and the trade-off is someone might get killed. It's like treating a rash with a drug that could give you a heart attack. That's a far cry from, "with this technology something that took days and $$$$ now takes hours and $" as was the case with all the older examples you listed.

If self driving cars were more like airplanes, I'd have a little more faith. Tesla's marketing BS doesn't inspire me with lots of faith.

On black boxes: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/what-does-it-mean-if-my-m...

[grumple]

> Self driving cars are a nice luxury, especially in city driving, not something that radically improves our world. You get to read your phone instead of paying attention, and the trade-off is someone might get killed. It's like treating a rash with a drug that could give you a heart attack. That's a far cry from, "with this technology something that took days and $$$$ now takes hours and $" as was the case with all the older examples you listed.

This is the opposite of the premise and the conclusion is the total opposite of the goal of self driving cars. A core premise of self driving cars is that they will be far safer than human-driven vehicles. 1.35 million people are killed on roadways every year globally. Saving over a million lives a year means a lot. The technology isn't quite there yet, but it is likely that it will be and the promise is quite real. It's not like Tesla's are killing people at a significantly higher rate than regular drivers with Autopilot - which does not seem to be true [1].

1. https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

[bumby]

There are plenty of resources that demonstrate why those statistics can be misleading. Chief among them, not all miles are created equal. It’s like claiming autopilot in airplanes is significantly safer than ape-controlled aircraft. It’s partly true because apes control the hard parts (takeoff and landing) and leave the more easy parts to software

[judge2020]

It'll probably be best to stick to U.S. statistics because it'll show the statistical difference between manual driving in a modern car and automated driving in a modern car, versus 'globally' which includes cars in countries that aren't designed with the same safety we have and will lag at least a decade behind the US in receiving level 3+ ADAS when it becomes available.

[nexuist]

> You get to read your phone instead of paying attention, and the trade-off is someone might get killed.

You get to drive, and the trade-off is someone might get killed. Your comment almost makes me think you haven't driven a car before, because you would remember the dull terror of seeing your life flash before your eyes for the 40th time this year because some moron ran a red and slammed the brakes in the middle of the intersection you were about to cross.

Until recently motor vehicle accidents were a leading cause of death in the US. Saying that self driving would just be a luxury feature is truly a luxury position compared to those that have lost loved ones to drunk driving, speeding, snow, rain, new drivers, old drivers, blind drivers, and any other of the myriad of ways to get yourself killed on a road. All of which would disappear with level 5 self driving.

> That's a far cry from, "with this technology something that took days and $$$$ now takes hours and $"

Extrapolate the future and realize that once self driving is solved for one vehicle it's solved for all of them, and truck/bus/taxi driving as a profession will go bust. Without having to pay human drivers that also need breaks, pensions, health insurance etc. all these services can offer lower prices.

[bumby]

>All of which would disappear with level 5 self driving.

I think the post was about managing the risk that occurs before level 5 is reached. Assuming that it’s either on the immediate horizon or a foregone conclusion seems to be dismissive of those nascent risks

[entee]

I drive a lot, thanks. If you can prove me level-5 or even very good level 4 autonomous driving, and that a computational driver makes radically fewer fatal mistakes than a human, then I'm with you. In other words, if you can satisfy a good regulatory regime like the say, airplanes or drugs, then great.

Short of that, it's a luxury and a danger.

[jjav]

> because you would remember the dull terror of seeing your life flash before your eyes for the 40th time this year

Is this really something you go through?

In ~35 years of driving, I've never experienced this.

If you are having near-death driving experiences 40 times per year, something is wrong.

[inglor_cz]

"Self driving cars are a nice luxury, especially in city driving, not something that radically improves our world."

With truly autonomous vehicles, you can have a radically different logistics for goods, delivery services etc. You can also have specialized "sleeper cars" that get you to your destination overnight, fresh and ready.

Self driving cars can also park themselves somewhere out of sight and stop clogging inner cities.

[entee]

I'd agree if it works as advertised. Level 5 or very close to it is the key. No system has shown that, much less Tesla's. In the meantime, doing a live experiment with 3,000+ pound machines moving at 30+ mph seems like a bad idea.

[hexatin]

> You can also have specialized "sleeper cars" that get you to your destination overnight, fresh and ready.

Trains have had this capability for decades, and that is a very mature technology, with the upside of also carrying far more people at a time than a car-based system would.