(no title)
vlan0 | 10 months ago
Let's look at some raw data. Mind you, we have 100x more data for the human drivers below. ie, billions of miles vs millions for automated drivers.
Pop examined Fatal-crash rate All Level‑4 automated‑driving tests in the U.S. 1.5–1.7 per 100 M mi Drivers 70‑74 yr 1.7 per 100 M mi Drivers 75‑79 yr 2.1 per 100 M mi Drivers 80‑84 yr 4.3 per 100 M mi Drivers ≥ 85 yr 7.6 per 100 M mi
So statistically, you are much more likely to be killed by a senior citizen. So to make a consistent argument using data around safety, we should maybe be revoking the licenses of older folks?
edit: Jesus, 19% of all US fatal crashes in 2023 invloved seniors. While they make up 15% of the driver population.
callc|10 months ago
Heck I was in a parking lot yesterday and almost got hit by a truck, driver is a very old man.
In terms of safety of AVs and human drivers, AVs need to cause 10x less fatalities than humans do in order to be widely accepted by people. It’s an emotional thing.
Just like these humanoid robots we’re seeing companies develop. If we let them loose in society, would it be ok if they only committed murder 1% less than humans do?
People naturally hold the bar higher for robots and computers. It might be for the lack of accountability. I’m not sure of other reasons why this is
mikrotikker|10 months ago
analog31|10 months ago
vlan0|10 months ago
Speed, alcohol, lower seat-belt use, and of course, inexperience are listed as the primary contributing factors.