Hacker News Reader

Comment by jrpt | Hacker News Reader

To the extent their actions delay the development and deployment of self-driving vehicles, they're responsible for deaths due to bad human drivers (since that's what self-driving vehicles are replacing). The faster we get self-driving vehicles, the better.

View on HN

I like the idea of self driving cars as I am lazy and want to do other things than drive.

But on thst note, if we invested the same $billions in trains/light rail we would have great public transport networks that could do the same thing for the whole population...

We don't need self driving cars we want them because they are sexy. Unsexy public transport will be better for our cities.

Edit: spelling

> But on thst note, if we invested the same $billions in trains/light rail we would have great public transport networks that could do the same thing for the whole population...

No, we couldn’t.

Reengineering cities around trains/light rail is expensive; the infrastructure debt of car-optimized development is enormous.

Is it worth paying down? Sure. But its still there.

Yes we can. Cars and traffic won't get better with self driving cars... Other options with larger amounts of travellers at once needs to be looked at.....

Better is automated vehicles in a car share program.

Mass transit has too many pain points and the 'last mile' problem to be the single solution.

We need to have a "mixed" solution.

Are self-driving compagnies taking responsibility for the deaths due to their bad software?

It seems more likely to me that the Cruise and Waymo engineers will respond by making tweaks to ignore cones, which then could cause new kinds of crashes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com