
The Positive Impact of Advanced Safety Systems for Cars - keltex
http://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/positive-impact-of-advanced-safety-systems-for-cars/
======
melling
My feeling is that we don't need fully autonomous cars to get a lot of the
safety benefits. About 40,000 people die on US roads every year, along with
millions of injuries.

[http://asirt.org/initiatives/informing-road-users/road-
safet...](http://asirt.org/initiatives/informing-road-users/road-safety-
facts/road-crash-statistics)

Shouldn't it be possible to cut these numbers in half with advanced
"assistance?

~~~
mlinksva
It is also possible to cut those numbers with low tech: less driving. Stop
subsidizing roads and parking, start allowing walkable development. Take back
the streets.
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236825193_Street_Ri...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236825193_Street_Rivals_Jaywalking_and_the_Invention_of_the_Motor_Age_Street)

~~~
Animats
"Walkable development" led to two-bedroom apartments in SF averaging
$4637/month.

Cities are getting way too big. It's much worse outside the US; NYC was 8
million in the 1960s, and it's 8.2 million now. Beijing is up to 21.5 million,
and China's government is trying hard to keep it from growing further.

~~~
CalRobert
'"Walkable development" led to two-bedroom apartments in SF averaging
$4637/month.' \- citation massively needed.

If walkable areas are expensive, that's presumably because

A) people want to live in them and will pay a lot for it.

B) there is more demand for said areas than supply.

Which, in effect, means exactly the opposite of your assertion - forced sprawl
(making most of the bay low density suburban) is what led to the
aforementioned $4637 /mo apartments.

