Yes that is the right and winning argument from the statistics point of view. However problem is when you are in a middle of accident (as aptly termed in the iRobot,.. you are experiencing an accident), your evasive action to avoid accident or make it a less of an accident is driven by your emotions and motiviation to stay alive and well. If course there are idiots who make decision worse than the robot or anything but still motivation drives you. In case of computer program making the decision to avoid accident, first of all, it can not recognize and make a good decision where it will try to fall back to its learned method but based on infinite different types of scenarios which is likely to be the case as long as accidents are concerned it is likely to make some random decision definitely not in an interest or consciousness to save its car owner. Result is there is going to be some very hard gruesome accident than it coudl have been because computer program just does not care whether you are in a gruesome terrible accident or just fender bender. This is more like a microcosm of the individual sitaution rather than statictisc. sure you could far less likely to be in accident but once you are in accident, i would be prefer not the computer make a decision in behalf of me.
You're assigning some kind of impossible perfection to the human driver, and some sort of evil, or at least "machine-like" motivations to the autopilot - neither of which make the least amount of sense. Humans panic, react too slowly, freeze, do the wrong thing for a variety of reasons, or simply miss what's going on because their attention was elsewhere - and autopilot programs are written by human beings. Ones who are NOT distracted by being in the middle of an accident, who do not have to react instantly, and who have their work double and triple checked by other humans... and which work gets refined as time goes by and we discover missed scenarios or errors. A computer program "does not care"... but that has as much to do with accident prevention as your air bag "caring". It doesn't have to care; it just has to work. As to a computer making a decision on your behalf... sorry, that's just funny. Thousands of computers have, do, and will "decide" on your behalf - and you like it, and take advantage of it whenever you can. The house you live in, the car you drive, the food you eat... it's pretty much 100% that all of these things had a computer "decide", somewhere along the line, that this is acceptable and valid, and that is not. If they didn't, you car, food, and house would cost 10-100 times as much - and you wouldn't be able to afford them. (Nor would they be of nearly as good a quality. Humans are fallible, you know.)
i am not sure wtf you are talking about, i never said abou evil and perfectness. this fact that you are in need of some reasoning and comprehension class does not mean i am going to argue with you
Yes, TSLA selling cars is like AMZN selling books. Same playbook. Your TSLA car is an entertainment/communication hub, with cellular/wifi connection to download and subscribe to Netflix, games, etc. and charge your TSLA using home charger power by TSLA solar panels and TSLA battery storage packs on your TSLA computer that seamlessly links to your TSLA car, tie together by Starlink.... Ford and GM do not stand a chance.
I don't get how people could be so lazy to allow their lives to be in the hands of a robot so they could save a little bit of energy from driving. That to me is pure stupidity. The only time I'd ever see this being useful is if someone is too impaired to drive, and even then it's cheaper to call an Uber than to spend thousands on a car that you can drink and drive in.
Since you clearly don't know how to read or write English, I'll spell it out in Moron: You're a primitive caveman, with zero understanding of technology who is scared of the Big Bad Machine. Also, human language - which you don't speak - contains implications. No, you didn't SAY "abou evil and perfectness" - but your empty-headed blithering about "bad computer don't think about meeee!!!" IMPLIES those things. Goodbye, brainless prat. No need to reply; you're on ignore, where useless drivel like yours belongs.
1. Minimize and avoid accidents, human errors. New cars with emergency collision avoidance and backing auto-stop systems do save lives for example, autopilot will save more. 2. Freedom and mobility for those too old or too disable to drive.
Same for amazon alexa, cant even stand the name. google voice recognition now poorer than ever, it is simply better to just type than speaking to ill-recognizing voice assistant.
That's a good point but would you trust your life with a robot? Does a robot take everything going on into consideration or does it just do what it's programmed to do? When I see an idiot on the road that wants to pass me, I move over and let him pass, because I don't want that idiot following me. Tell me how a computer takes things like this into consideration? Even if I were old, I would be uncomfortable having a computer handle my life. There are already numerous reports of crashes from auto pilot drivers. No thanks, I will use the small amount of energy and thinking it takes me to drive.