rlhamil
Well-known member
- First Name
- Richard
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2020
- Threads
- 6
- Messages
- 553
- Reaction score
- 603
- Location
- Glen Burnie, Maryland
- Vehicles
- 2002 Trans Am WS6, 2018 Kia Sportage, 2024 Cyberbeast FS
- Occupation
- retired
That's an argument in favor of automation, of course.You think humans do "mostly well enough" in terms of safety?
1.9 million auto fatalities in 2023 would argue otherwise. Do you understand what 1.9 million fatalities looks like? I fail to see how anyone thinks 1,900,000 deaths in only one year is acceptable. That's a bloodbath!
But "mostly well enough" means most drivers and passengers live their lives without dying because of a car accident. In the ideal, zero is the only acceptable number of deaths, but the ideal is not realistic.
And that number is worldwide; in the US it's more like 45,000 or so; about 1/5 of all deaths by accidents of various sorts. The US total is roughly comparable with firearms deaths...but more than half of those are suicides. You could look at it that driving drunk, drugged, exhausted, or distracted is a form of suicide by Russian roulette, albeit with the risk of taking others down too.
The problem is that while widespread adoption of automation merely better than the average driver would save lives, most people think that they are better than the average driver (which cannot be true for all that think so), and in any event would expect automation to be better than they are, at the level of an always alert expert driver.
Sponsored