[smaryjerry]

I don’t think it has to be a bad thing. It be an interesting statistical problem. What is worse, a person who drives sleepy for 5 hours each day or a person who gives up control to a computer for 5 hours each day. Point being we are attempting to compare FSD to complete perfect driving, when the comparison should be with current drivers. If it is an improvement or reduction in crashes why not use it? Maybe it’s because we aren’t sure who to blame in case something goes wrong? I know back seat drivers that get uncomfortable as a passenger a lot even with a driver with zero accidents and would rather drive themselves, yet have crashed several times themselves at their fault. They misjudge their own abilities and the situation, a need for certain aggressive driving. I think many are misjudging the average drivers ability without self driving and we could be causing a lot of loss of life by not taking a statistically better option out of human hubris.

[ycombobreaker]

This is not a valid comparison, though. Rather, consider the extrapolation: "drive for 20 hours or let a computer drive for 20 hours?". (edit: the extrapolation is intended to highlight the absurdity of the premise.) The correct answer is to mitigate the risk with breaks or safer alternative transport such as a hired driver. It's not a closed system with only two possible solutions.

If the solution is not tenable, the plan should be aborted. Not rammed through via abuse of technology.

[smaryjerry]

I didn’t say it was a closed system. I’m just saying one might be better than the other, I don’t know how you do that other than compare the possibilities. If everyone had a private driver then yea that options is also better but we live in a human world not a perfect world.