• Tankton
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    6 months ago

    The sad part of this is somehow thinking that payment solves any problem. Like, idk what they would pay me, just bring back my dead wife/child/father whatever. You can’t fix everything with money.

    • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      It only works on a small handful of freeways (read: no pedestrians) in California/Nevada, and only under 40 MPH. The odds of a crash within those parameters resulting in a fatality are quite low.

    • Llewellyn
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Human drivers are far more dangerous on the road, and you should be applauding assisted driving development.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This presumes the options are only:

        • Human and no autonomous system watching
        • Autonomous system, with no meaningful human attention

        Key word is ‘assisted’ driving. ADAS should roughly be a nice add, so long as human attention is policed. Ultimately, the ADAS systems are better able to react to some situations, but may utterly make some stupid calls in exceptional scenarios.

        Here, the bar of ‘no human paying attention at all’ is one I’m not entirely excited about celebrating. Of course the conditions are “daytime traffic jam only”, where risk is pretty small, you might have a fender bender, pedestrians are almost certainly not a possibility, and the conditions are supremely monotonous, which is a great area for ADAS but not a great area for bored humans.