XPost: rec.arts.comics.strips   
   From: petertrei@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/17/2025 11:54 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   > 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.   
      
   Here in the Boston area accidents  seem to get coverage on local   
   TV news if there's an injury, or it held up traffic. We don't have   
   any driverless cars here yet, just regular "Massholes".   
      
   pt   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)