On the other hand, if you know that the technology is not completely infallible, but better than humans in a general sense and will save lives by releasing it, wouldn't you be morally obligated to do so? Wouldn't holding it back even though it would save lives be worse?
I think people will prefer risking being killed by their own mistakes than by the mistakes of an AI, even if that risk is somewhat higher, maybe even considerably higher.
Nope... I am actually happy to admit that I am a below average driver (as driving is sooo boring), and from what I read, the AI is already driving better than me - if used in the conditions it is designed for.
Don't they already have that choice, though? No one is forcing anyone to use Autopilot.
That's my main issue with the parent posts and the self-driving sentiments they're expressing - the person using it was grossly negligent and ignored all the warnings presented. You accept that the technology is in beta and that you accept the risks of that. The person ignoring those warnings is, more than likely, much less safer of driver than Autopilot ever could be.
I just really don't see how this could be pinned as Tesla's fault. We're treading very closely to territory where we absolve people of personal responsibility simply because we have technology that we can blame, even if it's irrational or misdirected blame.
Does it matter what you prefer? You're also risking everybody else's lives while driving. Should they have a decision in whether you're allowed to drive?
This might be harder to gauge than you think. Maybe a Tesla is much safer on the highway, but less safe in the city, or the other way around. Or less safe on ice, etc. The averaged risk (and we probably won't have anything else for a while) over the whole population might be quite different from that for your actual use.
It can't be marginally better than humans, it has to be an order of magnitude or more better. Humans are irrational, and incidents like this erode public trust.
I agree, but there is also news about how Tesla's automatic braking features saved people from getting into collisions. I would think that might counteract some of the negative news.
See this one from six months ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ndeb1pMAsh4
It shouldn't counteract the negative news because every car manufacturer offers automatic emergency breaking as a feature so it's not a distinguishing benefit of Tesla, it works fine without Tesla's controversial and dangerous Autopilot mode enabled, the main example Elon Musk himself posted of it preventing a collision was in manual mode in conditions totally unsuitable for Autopilot, and the entire industry already agrees that it's a worthwhile safety improvement. I believe it's even going to become mandatory on new cars in the US at some point for safety reasons.
Most manufacturers have automatic braking. But they do not pretend it's "autopilot" nor let user to rely on it. It's just there to save their ass if shit hits the fan.
Apart from this being a very basic feature in almost every (premium) car manufacturer offers, this is a very grave misunderstanding of human psychology. You can never cancel fear with good news. Otherwise we'd be happy about how safe we are today, not worrying about terrorism (in the US that is, there are countries with legitimate elevated terrorism risks that are scary and actually worrisome).
I think your point is void here, because in both of the cases I mentioned, the car was clearly worse than a human. Who drives into a concrete barrier or the middle of a tractor trailer truck?
If the technology were better than humans I'd agree.
>>Who drives into a concrete barrier or the middle of a tractor trailer truck?
I have seen a drunk driver do exactly that.
Someone who falls asleep might also do that.
[edit] Come to think of it, I have almost caused an accident a decade ago. I was momentarily distracted as I turned to talk to my passenger. I was able to brake in time, as a car in front of me had suddenly stopped. Nevertheless, it was only a matter of maybe one second to avoid running into the other car. Me-a-decade ago might been in a similar accident.
I know one person that drove into a light post in the middle of an empty parking lot. Daylight, sober, not texting, not tired, not stunting - they were looking at the exit and simply didn't see the one light post between their car and the exit. "That light came out of nowhere!"
Human car accidents are not news because roughly 100 Americans die in car accidents every day, out of ~15300 car accidents per day.
Also somebody who's been blinded by a bright light, or is suffering from a medical event, or is looking at their cell phone. There are lots of things that cause people to hit objects that should be easily avoidable.
> I think your point is void here, because in both of the cases I mentioned, the car was clearly worse than a human.
But separate cases are not really interesting when comparing accident rates. Think of a more extreme made up scenario:
You can either drive yourself and be part of the "1.25 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles" statistic (US), or use an automated car which causes 0.25 deaths - but it spontaneously explodes in that case. No other car would just explode randomly while you're driving it. (It's clearly worse in that way)
Do you want to drive yourself, or take the automated one?
> Who drives into a concrete barrier or the middle of a tractor trailer truck?
It happens all the time, dude. Most famously with Jayne Mansfield, but commonly when people are paying attention to their damned phones, or trying to sort out a fight among the kids, or just distracted by their marriage, or work problems, or...
I used to know a woman who drove right into a city bus that was stopped at a bus stop, lights flashing and everything. Fortunately no one was injured in that accident.
It's a tough thing to weigh however when it's perhaps "better than humans" in 98% of situations, but "on par with" or perhaps even "worse than humans" for the remaining 2%. That's where it gets sketchy to me, at least.
That said, I'm casually in the market for a Tesla (ideally pre-owned) and one of the features I'd require is the latest auto-pilot hardware. I'd definitely make use of it right away too -- but I'd do so with the understanding that it is far from infallible, and that I still need to keep substantially all of my attention trained to the road just as I would in any other non-autopilot vehicle.
