San Francisco protestors are disabling autonomous vehicles using traffic cones | "It's a great time"

https://lemmy.world/post/1347033

San Francisco protestors are disabling autonomous vehicles using traffic cones | "It's a great time" - LemmyWorld

Safe Streets Rebel’s protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said…

Thousands of accidents a year from human drivers. I sleep

90 accidents a year from autonomous vehicles. Lazer eyes

You make it sound like it’s a 50/50 split between human drivers and autonomous vehicles, which is definitely not the case.

There are way more human drivers than autonomous vehicles. So, when an autonomous vehicle runs your child or pet over or whatever, who do you blame? The company? The programmers? The DMV for even allowing them on the road in the first place?

What’s an autonomous vehicle do if it gets a flat? Park in the middle of the interstate like an idiot instead of pulling over and phone home for a mechanic?

You need to first ask yourself if it more important to put blame than to minimize risk.

“Autonomous vehicles could potentially reduce traffic fatalities by up to 90%.”

“Autonomous vehicle accidents have been recorded at a slightly lower rate compared with conventional cars, at 4.7 accidents per million miles driven.”

blog.gitnux.com/driverless-car-accident-statistic…

Driverless Car Accident Statistics And Trends in 2023 • GITNUX

As the world moves towards a more automated future, driverless cars are becoming increasingly popular. With this new technology comes an array of potential

GITNUX
That opinion puts a lot of blind faith in the companies developing self driving and their infinitely altruistic motives.
You don’t need to put faith into companies beyond the faith that is put into humans. Make companies just as financially liable as humans are, and you’ll still see a decrease in accidents.
You mean those companies who will lobby and spend a fraction of their wealth to make those lawsuits disappear?
How is that different from the current system of large vehicular insurance companies spending a fraction of their wealth to make their lawsuits disappear?
It’s no different at all. We should have stronger laws for such scenarios.

Ok, but in the context of letting computers drive, I feel like people want to enforce this perfect system of liability on automated systems where we already have an existing criminal and civil legal system as is that is designed to nowhere near the same standard for humans.

Why are we willing to say that it is unacceptable that no computer can kill people on the road when almost 43,000 die in the USA due to humans driving?

Uh, because software can be fixed and those deaths can be prevented? How the hell can you ask this question seriously? I can’t believe how many people are willing to blatantly shill for these companies, even if it gets people fucking killed for no reason.

And until the system is perfect, let people die on the worse system?

This isn’t me shilling for a company, this is me comparing two flawed systems.