The first study of self-driving car accidents reported they were involved in accidents at a higher rate than conventional vehicles. 2-5 times as likely. This was based on the number of accidents per number of vehicles on the road. So, that was for 11 Google cars versus a gazillion regular ones.
A later study, looked at accidents per million miles driven. In this case, the self-driving cars came out ahead – 3.2 accidents per million miles versus 4.2 accidents per million miles for driver-driven cars.
A later study, looked at accidents per million miles driven. In this case, the self-driving cars came out ahead – 3.2 accidents per million miles versus 4.2 accidents per million miles for driver-driven cars.
In all cases, the self-driving cars were not at fault. And, there were only minor injuries.
But, the self-driving cars were not at fault. What if this continues?
Self-driving cars proliferate. They become 1% of the U.S. vehicles on the road. Then, 2% … 4% … 8%.
And, they continue to be involved in accidents not their fault.
The statistics may then be interpreted to indicate drivers are inadequately trained … I know you find that hard to believe but consider. If driver-driven cars continue to run into self-driving cars without the reverse taking place, how can we not reach the conclusion that driver-driven cars are, in fact, a hazard for self-driving cars?
What could possibly be done? More stringent driver licensing requirements? If alcohol or illicit drug use is a prevalent cause of such accident, shouldn’t testing devices be required for all driver-driven cars?
In truth, there are no “accidents” when considering vehicular traffic. They don’t just happen without reason or cause. Someone made a mistake, a misjudgment, took a chance, didn’t do their job right.
We have come to associate the word “accident” with the incidents of damage and/or injury involving driver-driven vehicles.
Consider the word “accidental” – happening by chance, unintentionally, or unexpectedly. You can stretch “unintentional” to mean “he didn’t intend to kill anyone when he drove drunk” but he did intend to drink.
Whoa … off on a tangent there … sorry.
So, what about self-driving vehicles?
I PREDICT: As they become more numerous and the incidents of them being hit by driver-driven vehicles continue and increase, the privilege of driving your own vehicle is likely to become more & more restricted.
What about insurance? Because they are likely to be hit with almost no chance of hitting, should users of self-driving vehicles pay higher rates? Higher rates because others hit them? Nay, nay, say I. Self-driving vehicles are safer and should, therefore, be entitled to much lower rates than those hitting them.
You read it here first.
But, the self-driving cars were not at fault. What if this continues?
Self-driving cars proliferate. They become 1% of the U.S. vehicles on the road. Then, 2% … 4% … 8%.
And, they continue to be involved in accidents not their fault.
The statistics may then be interpreted to indicate drivers are inadequately trained … I know you find that hard to believe but consider. If driver-driven cars continue to run into self-driving cars without the reverse taking place, how can we not reach the conclusion that driver-driven cars are, in fact, a hazard for self-driving cars?
What could possibly be done? More stringent driver licensing requirements? If alcohol or illicit drug use is a prevalent cause of such accident, shouldn’t testing devices be required for all driver-driven cars?
In truth, there are no “accidents” when considering vehicular traffic. They don’t just happen without reason or cause. Someone made a mistake, a misjudgment, took a chance, didn’t do their job right.
We have come to associate the word “accident” with the incidents of damage and/or injury involving driver-driven vehicles.
Consider the word “accidental” – happening by chance, unintentionally, or unexpectedly. You can stretch “unintentional” to mean “he didn’t intend to kill anyone when he drove drunk” but he did intend to drink.
Whoa … off on a tangent there … sorry.
So, what about self-driving vehicles?
I PREDICT: As they become more numerous and the incidents of them being hit by driver-driven vehicles continue and increase, the privilege of driving your own vehicle is likely to become more & more restricted.
What about insurance? Because they are likely to be hit with almost no chance of hitting, should users of self-driving vehicles pay higher rates? Higher rates because others hit them? Nay, nay, say I. Self-driving vehicles are safer and should, therefore, be entitled to much lower rates than those hitting them.
You read it here first.
