Because any suggestion that driverless cars might present any hint of increased risk in any possible scenario amounts to mindless Luddite paranoia and should be dismissed out of hand?
Who's talking about "stopping progress immediately?" The FBI doesn't appear to be saying that in this article, rather they seem to be speculating on how driverless cars might tactically change the dynamics of a vehicular pursuit, which is a perfectly valid thing for them to do. Because they're right - you can shoot at the cops a lot better when you don't have to worry about a steering wheel.
Also, the Pope is upset because unmarried people could have sex in the back seat while the car drives itself. There is really no end to the infinite possibilities.
>any hint of increased risk in any possible scenario amounts to mindless Luddite paranoia
Not any hint, but this particular one...yes. Dismissed out of hand. A get away driver (an idea that has been around for a very long time) would be far better than a computer that will stop for literally anything in front of it.
The FBI pushing such stupidity is embarrassing to me as an American. Next they'll report that if banks didn't have money they'd never get robbed.
I don't think the report (which is apparently unreleased so i'm speculating) is suggesting that the autonomous car itself presents a greater threat in traffic, but that the driver who no longer has to worry about operating the vehicle is more free to shoot at the cops and bystanders and whatnot - which would be true.
Who's talking about "stopping progress immediately?" The FBI doesn't appear to be saying that in this article, rather they seem to be speculating on how driverless cars might tactically change the dynamics of a vehicular pursuit, which is a perfectly valid thing for them to do. Because they're right - you can shoot at the cops a lot better when you don't have to worry about a steering wheel.