Regardless, people who are on transit or in autonomous vehicles are people who won't be increasing roadway risk. AVs can adopt new driving rules without the typical years of political struggle over license points. AVs also have capabilities for better traffic shaping in cities. Responding to SF's market street closure was very easy with AVs. It was the uber drivers and tourists who struggled.
Meanwhile, she persisted, we could have zero deaths tomorrow if it was important to our culture. As we each recognized, the culture clearly isn’t changing anytime soon — but that lack of cultural concern invalidates “reduces deaths” as a relevant marketing claim for robotic cars. Why is it the preferred talking point for advocates when it’s demonstrably irrelevant?
I genuinely don't understand what policy changes you think would lead to zero deaths tomorrow. We'd still have deaths even if no one left their driveway without a valid CDL and a resolve to never exceed 10km/h.
Yeah, I get that; and! some of it is particularly nonintuitive outcomes from human psych/soci that look ghastly through a rational behavior lens. There’s a lot of reading that one can do on the subject if independently curious.
