Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 748 posts

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#41

Post by raincole »

jjordan wrote: post #19
n0us wrote: post #7

Growing proof that PR for autonomous car companies has aligned on a strategy of painting you as a bad person if you want to drive your own car, and therefore you should pay them money to continue being a good person.

There should be laws put in place to ensure drivers will always be able to drive their cars, if they choose, and also prevent insurance companies from skyrocketing your rates for doing so. This is IMO past due.

There should be laws taxing people who insist on driving themselves. And the money should be used to subsidize people who switch to self-driving or install automatic assisted systems on their old cars. That'd partially mitigate the externality generated by human drivers.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#43

Post by WillPostForFood »

n0us wrote: post #7

Growing proof that PR for autonomous car companies has aligned on a strategy of painting you as a bad person if you want to drive your own car, and therefore you should pay them money to continue being a good person.

No post body was provided.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#44

Post by iknowstuff »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #9

Is there a standard that these cars have to meet? Really there should be an obstacle course of some kind based on the most common anomalies leading to accidents. Partially obscured road signs, worn paint markings, obscured sight lines caused by dense parking, driving on a snowed over surface, etc.

Real world data results are so much more important than an obstacle course to overfit for.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#45

Post by linkregister »

gottorf wrote: post #29
matchbok3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How selfish. Why should I, someone who wants a safer AV, subsidize those who are riskier drivers? Extremely selfish.

This happens in insurance all the time. Healthy people who eat right and exercise subsidize people with poor habits. It appears to some degree that we as a society do not want risk priced optimally to each individual.

It is understandable that you think this is the case as someone who is not above the age of 50. You will see that health and life insurance premiums rise precipitously once you reach certain milestones. Once you reach 90 years old, you will find that car insurance companies will discontinue your policy based on a single traffic ticket.

We replaced preexisting condition coverage with age-based tiered pricing. If you doubt me it's trivial to validate this using your state's ACA marketplace.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#46

Post by ThrowawayTestr »

bko wrote: post #22
n0us wrote: post #7

Growing proof that PR for autonomous car companies has aligned on a strategy of painting you as a bad person if you want to drive your own car, and therefore you should pay them money to continue being a good person.

Growing proof that comment sections from tech forums have been overrun with unhelpful negativity unrelated to the actual posts they're commenting on.

[flagged]

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#47

Post by Terr_ »

stephencanon wrote: post #30
epgui wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, the only times I've ever noticed these chimes and the auto-braking (even automatic rolling-up of windows), it was false positives, and it was mildly terrifying: for a brief and unexpected moment I was no longer in control of my vehicle. [Recent Honda Civic and Audi A3 models]

I've only had a couple weeks in rentals with automatic emergency braking, and was very nearly been rear-ended twice due to false positives. Anecdotal, and I'm sure they'll improve with time, but I would never allow the system I experienced anywhere near a car I owned. It was profoundly unsafe.

Assuming you're already stuck with such a vehicle, is there any benefit to a dashcam that captures the alert-noises to prove the that you, the driver, never chose to brake unsafely?

I realize this relies heavily on the questionable sanity and ethics of insurance companies. Even if they agree you aren't personally at fault, they'd probably just increase the premiums for everyone with that model, rather than sue the car manufacturer.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#48

Post by atleastoptimal »

n0us wrote: post #7

Growing proof that PR for autonomous car companies has aligned on a strategy of painting you as a bad person if you want to drive your own car, and therefore you should pay them money to continue being a good person.

You cannot deny the evidence though, driverless cars are safer per-mile than human drivers on average. 1/100 deaths in the United States are due to car accidents, even shaving off 10% of those would save ~4000 people per year.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#49

Post by lefra »

intrasight wrote: post #35
jjordan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be laws put in place to ensure drivers will always be able to drive their cars, if they choose, and also prevent insurance companies from skyrocketing your rates for doing so. This is IMO past due.

I agree with your first statement but certainly not with the second. Rates for human drivers should and will skyrocket. Individual states may try to push back with regulation but it won't succeed in the long-term

Rates for human drivers are currently at the correct level for insurance companies to pay for damage and make some profit.

If autonomous cars result in less damage than humans, their insurance price will be cheaper than human drivers, but there's no reason to raise the human rate at the same time, their accident rate should stay the same.

Re: Growing proof that autonomous cars save lives

#50

Post by jjordan »

jedberg wrote: post #27
jjordan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be laws put in place to ensure drivers will always be able to drive their cars, if they choose, and also prevent insurance companies from skyrocketing your rates for doing so. This is IMO past due.

Why? Insurance companies use detailed risk data. If they discover that letting you drive your own car is a much higher risk than an auto-drive, why should they not be allowed to account for that? Insurance companies aren't political -- they charge for whatever costs more.

Yes, I definitely trust insurance companies to do the right thing here.
Post reply on HN