XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips   
   From: bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com   
      
   On 10/17/25 05:47, Scott Dorsey wrote:   
   > Cryptoengineer   wrote:   
   >>   
   >> They don't have to be perfect - they merely have to statistically   
   >> safer than human drivers. I agree that unless we get AGI that can   
   >> fit in a car, there will be situations where a human can handle   
   >> a situation that a car can't.   
   >   
   > That's the problem.  People will demand they be perfect.  They can't just   
   > be better, they have to be perfect for the general public to accept them.   
   >   
   > When somebody runs over a pedestrian it doesn't even make the newspaper in   
   > a big city.  It might make page three of the weekly paper here in rural   
   > Virginia, along with the article about the high schooler who got a   
   scholarship   
   > to Yale and the new hotdog shop opening.   
      
   	These days you are lucky to have a Newspaper in a major conurbation.   
   	The accidents are frequently covered on TV in San Francisco and   
   sometimes the   
   SF Chronicle will give the accident and susequent problems space   
   especially if the   
   term "DUI" comes up.  The incidents covered involving the driverless   
   vehicles show   
   that people are interferring with vehicles more often than vehicles are   
   interfering   
   with people. Auto-navigating Cars have not been designed to deal wit   
   anti-car   
   protesters.   
      
   	bliss   
   >   
   > But when an automated car runs over a pedestrian, it makes the national news   
   > and if it doesn't lead it comes close to it.   
   > --scott   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)