The Real Moral Dilemma of Self-Driving Cars

  • Опубликовано: 19 янв 2017
  • We talk about all the potentially challenging situations autonomous cars could get into but not about how human drivers are not very good. Tens of thousands die on the roads every year in collisions, most of which could be prevented by autonomous vehicles.
    Sponsored by BMW
    I wanted to make a video about autonomous cars for some time but I hadn't had the opportunity. The self-driving technology is already at a state where it can save lives if only it were more widely implemented.
    Links to original clips:
    BBC Newsnight:видео.html&t=172s
    Music from "Ambient Electronic Groove," "Pet Animals 2," "The Long Ride."
    Filmed by Raquel Nuno
    Edited by Trevor Carlee

Комментарии • 6 658

  • MyChico333
    MyChico333 Год назад +9507

    People don't care about being safe, people care about feeling safe.
    Humans are morons by nature

    • Iago Mota
      Iago Mota Месяц назад

      "If self-driving cars don't fix 100% of the accidents, then NO."
      That kinda sounds like:
      "If laws against murder won't solve all murder, then NO."

    • Meade77
      Meade77 2 месяца назад

      Congratulations! You're a moron.

    • Autistic Aniki
      Autistic Aniki 2 месяца назад

      Good to know Veritaserum is anti-human.

    • Moon Wolf
      Moon Wolf 2 месяца назад +1

      So we're orcs don't care about stuff just killing and deaths

    • David Hill
      David Hill 3 месяца назад

      I ride motorcycles , yes fear of getting hurt sure makes you pay attention to what you are doing , my skills are the only thing stopping me from getting hurt .

  • The Firehawk
    The Firehawk 5 дней назад

    If the responsibility of what the car does autonomously falls to the owner, people will still drive manually, so to ensure this takes on and lives are spared, this responsibility cannot be of the owner of the vehicle, or, another option, is to lease them to people or have them serve as cabs so that the responsibility will be of the company.

  • Marty4650
    Marty4650 10 дней назад

    The moral dilemma here isn't about safety. There is absolutely no doubt that self driving cars will be safer, since they remove the factors of driver error, driver impairment, and driver distraction.. There will be fewer lives lost.
    The real dilemma is about how this will change our society:
    1. FIVE million jobs lost (truck, cab, delivery and bus drivers).
    2. More people commuting since they can sleep on their way to work.
    3. More people living further from their jobs, using more fuel.
    4. More traffic and congestion, as they let their cars "drive around the block" rather than paying for parking.
    5. More roads needed as people who couldn't use cars now can. (Blind, elderly, infirm.etc.)
    6. Less need to carpool or share rides resulting in more cars on the road.
    The real problem isn't safety. It is economic and societal. Eventually, it will happen, but it will seriously change the way we do things, and those changes will have a severe impact on our lives.
    My guess is that every one of those problems listed above will be solved in time. But there will be some real problems during the transition.

  • Kabup2
    Kabup2 12 дней назад

    Who will be guilt if a accident happens? The owner of the car, the fabric who build it, or the programmer? In the video, you was concerned about the responsability, that shows me even who is positive about this, don't want to take the risks.

    • Mohammed Lee
      Mohammed Lee 9 дней назад

      " Of course, in the end, a lot of lifes will be saved, and the few casualities will be worthy."
      This is 100% true. That's why autonomous driving is unavoidable.

    • Kabup2
      Kabup2 10 дней назад

      That's what I know so far, the driver is fully responsible alone, and he is trusting in the software blindly, his life and the other's. Of course, in the end, a lot of lifes will be saved, and the few casualities will be worthy. But it is not something I will be confortable soon.

    • Mohammed Lee
      Mohammed Lee 10 дней назад

      not true, since Tesla already has some sort of autopilot, the driver is 100% responsible using it, and in fact it is being used.

  • alex celedon
    alex celedon 12 дней назад

    You will never be as successful as VSauce, Michael here.

  • yammyharrone
    yammyharrone 16 дней назад

    Dead are the days of the 'good driver' 😢

  • shugaze
    shugaze 17 дней назад

    I'd prefer to wait a little longer before getting the self-driving cars on the road. Although the technology is quite impressive now, there's a lot of improvement that need to be made. There's research done Tesla Motors' autopilot mode, and it's only able to alert the driver of a motorcycle collision just under 60% of the time, compared to about 97% ish valid alerts with cars (I do have the link to the source, if anyone wants to fact check/correct this information). The biggest reason for this is because the DOT doesn't require motorcycle detection. I'm sure this will pose more of a problem with bicyclists, and possibly animals as well. I don't have any information on that, so correct me if I'm wrong. Although it'd cool to have self driving cars on the road now, being a motorcyclist that's already invisible to drivers, I'd rather wait for the standards to change before we make the cars more accessible.

  • Illinoska Buluama
    Illinoska Buluama 18 дней назад

    Well, for one, they're pricy...

  • Daniel Posner
    Daniel Posner 21 день назад

    33000 deaths and 2 million injuries a year on the roads of the US. That sounds a lot until you work out what those figure represent as a percentage of the number of car journeys each year in the US.
    Car journeys = 411,000,000,00 (411 billion)
    Deaths = 30,000. (according to this video)
    The chance of you dying the next time you go out in your car = 0.00007% (Google calculator :)
    Car journeys = 411,000,000,00 (411 billion)
    Injuries = 2,000,000. (according to this video)
    The chance of you sustaining an injury the next time you go out in your car = 0.005% (Google calculator :)
    Funny how figures can be used to manipulate how you feel about a subject.

  • eyechubcunt
    eyechubcunt 21 день назад

    I don't understand these moral judgements. Like anyone ever makes them. In the example the only course of action would be break. And stay in lane.

  • Akira Fenix
    Akira Fenix 25 дней назад

    Ah great.
    It's sponsored.
    Good, now i generate money to someone just by watching and i want to not do that.

  • runar68
    runar68 26 дней назад

    If you cant drive? Take the train/metro

  • Interdumensional Pie
    Interdumensional Pie 28 дней назад

    If an autonomous vehicle experiences an error, no matter how less likely that error occurs in respect to human driver errors. The company who developed the driving algorithm would be liable for the driver's death. Then legislation that directs the liability back to the driver just removes any incentive for the company to produce a reliable algorithm. If the driver kills themselves because of their own error then it's not the brand's fault and these companies are perfectly fine with it.

  • I/O
    I/O 28 дней назад +2

    So... technology is basically made to avoid the consequences of stupid people... I wonder how humanity has made it to 2018 without running extinct

  • Limitbreakur
    Limitbreakur 29 дней назад

    why aren't we getting them on the road faster? because the technology is far from being there.

    • Mohammed Lee
      Mohammed Lee 10 дней назад

      Tesla autopilot is already there

  • Zzz
    Zzz 29 дней назад

    I don't want a computer in control of my car. I like being in control.

  • Zzz
    Zzz 29 дней назад

    No, "we" are not using our phones. It's the irresponsible retards who are using their phones. Those folks are more dangerous than drunk drivers.

  • Alexander Campbell
    Alexander Campbell Месяц назад

    some will still chose do drive them selfs due lack of trust and also hacker are going to be a lot scarier

  • Jedd Schmidt
    Jedd Schmidt Месяц назад


  • CJ Walters
    CJ Walters Месяц назад

    It will really feel good when it drives you under a truck because it can't identify between the trailer and the SKY!

  • Victor Bahzad
    Victor Bahzad Месяц назад +1

    My question is the moral dilemma of "who should the car kill in a tough situation" a real question? cant we just program them to not get into stupid situations? and if every single car on the road was autonomous would it be even possible for a car to get into a crash that requires a tough choice?

    • Victor Bahzad
      Victor Bahzad 14 дней назад

      No, it's more like an airline pilot saying "let's not land our plane on a crowded Highway." interesting enough the interstate highway system was in fact intended to serve as a landing site for military planes.
      I really don't see how many of these "moral dilemmas" scenarios would actually occur at higher than 25 mph, which would give the car ample stopping time.

    • Victor Bahzad
      Victor Bahzad 16 дней назад

      Note, you're the one being the dipshit because as soon as I went into depth on my actual position on the subject you completely ignore the discussion and focus only on the accusation.
      many of these moral dilemmas presented could easily be avoided by programming the car to not go 60 miles an hour down a busy city road. which is actually illegal anyways. the cars drive cautious enough on their own for these artifical situatuion to be complete nonsense. I'd be interested in seeing what kind of accidents self driving cars actually do get into. but we wont know that until they are on the road for a good whle.

    • Burkutace27
      Burkutace27 16 дней назад

      *my original argument was that these moral dilemma situations will never happen in reality*
      That's like an airline pilot saying 'let's just not crash.'

    • Victor Bahzad
      Victor Bahzad 16 дней назад

      Its called black box problem-solving. Basically, you analyze the cause of real-world situations after the fact so that future accidents and deaths are less likely.
      My original argument isn't that self-driving cars can be perfect. my original argument was that these moral dilemma situations will never happen in reality and the only way for them to actually happen is if you program the car to actively seek out dangerous situations.
      Yes, there will be accidents but they will look nothing like these moral dilemmas presented.

  • BigPaaryna
    BigPaaryna Месяц назад

    Theres already 3 billion people more than earth can support right now. Too much safety is.. too much. no thanks.

  • Shorpy
    Shorpy Месяц назад

    Y'all tryna play cod ww2 on a 1998 mac? Yeah, didn't think so. I'm not trusting an old computer with my life. I'm sticking to human controlled vehicles, pre year 2000 to avoid annoying electronic assists.

  • Sander Vercammen
    Sander Vercammen Месяц назад

    What a surprise, a self driving BMW even double parks.

  • DoomRater
    DoomRater Месяц назад

    When personal transportation offers all the same advantages of mass transit... but just transporting me... won't self driving vehicles just make mass transit even less attractive? Cities still won't want to subsidize the costs of riding their systems and replacing a bus driver with an AI offers zero advantages to the bus rider. But an AI on my personal car? Now I don't even get driving fatigue while I arrive at my destination in a fifth of the time and I get all the other benefits of driving.

  • challengerbrant
    challengerbrant Месяц назад

    I drive because it is fun and enjoyable. I will not hand over the wheel to a computer.

  • Ashley ASHLEYM
    Ashley ASHLEYM Месяц назад

    I can hardly trust another human driving, there's no way I'm trusting a computer they mess up too much and I domt go in elevators because they mess up a little too often for my liking.

    • Kevin Dewitt
      Kevin Dewitt Месяц назад

      Self driving cars are safer then human drivers, that's part of the point.

  • Ñemazo
    Ñemazo 2 месяца назад

    You want to save lives at the expense of taking responsibility from people?
    You are going against evolution.
    You'll end up with a world full of idiots.
    That's immoral.

  • Jonas Gundlach
    Jonas Gundlach 2 месяца назад

    you are so smart its not normal. everything you do inspires me

  • Jason Yergler
    Jason Yergler 2 месяца назад

    So, how much did BMW pay you for this? You do realize that not being open and clear about their sponsorship damages your credibility, don't you? It makes me wonder about all your other videos. Were they sponsored, were you letting biases, whether personal or financial influence your point of view?

  • Steven L. Coleman
    Steven L. Coleman 2 месяца назад

    Do you think a Personal Rapid Transit system would be more energy and cost-efficient? And would self-driving cars still be more popular with them as an option?

  • dan f
    dan f 2 месяца назад

    but how will they perform in 4 feet of snow, blizzards, deep mud, middle of nowhere unmarked roads, on frozen lakes, or in places where maybe you want to slow down and enjoy some scenery?

  • null
    null 2 месяца назад

    Humans are smart enough to create intelligence beings, but foolish enough to fear them.

  • Todd Lerfondler
    Todd Lerfondler 2 месяца назад

    thats easy, just create a self sacrificial system that ensures the driver, passengers and people around your vehicle stay safe

  • nina koko
    nina koko 2 месяца назад

    But ppl can figure out how to hack it. It would be easier to kidnap ppl or even kill them!

  • Marcus_Mravik
    Marcus_Mravik 2 месяца назад

    I like the idea of cars that aid the driver (aka they'll correct the car or make adjustments). I don't want a car that completely takes the control away until I want it completely back. I want a car that gives complete control until it sees a problem imminent, then controls the car completely until the problem has passed.

  • Peppe Ddu
    Peppe Ddu 2 месяца назад

    There is no moral dilemma if it's a human choice.
    The driver should make those decision ahead of time, by setting up the right parameters in the self driving vehicle BEFORE the very first time he/she starts driving.
    - In an accident, should the car self crash in order to avoid injuring other people?
    - In an accident, should the car avoid hitting a bike or another vehicle first?
    - On a potential collision with an animal should the car try to save the animal or the passengers?
    etc etc.

  • manguirish sakhalkar
    manguirish sakhalkar 2 месяца назад

    its an bmw

  • Bevin Allison
    Bevin Allison 2 месяца назад

    I prefer the feeling of driving the car to the extent that my fav ones are still stick shifts. As a teen it was this huge right of passage. If given a choice I'd never take or drive in a non human controlled car. As for airplanes being auto flown, they still have trained pilots that can take over at anytime. However saying all that, I can see a market for auto cars for times when ppl cannot get from a to b due to handicap or age, but that's about it.

  • Negasuki
    Negasuki 2 месяца назад

    If software created by a company crashes a car I purchase, why would I actually choose take responsibility for that possibility?

  • Helium Valentine
    Helium Valentine 2 месяца назад

    Definitely swerve into the suv over the motorcycle. Very likely the svu will survive. It’s 100% the motorcyclist will die.
    It’s more of a dilemma for a big car vs a smaller car such as an SUV and a sedan.
    And the option not mentioned, to not swerve at all . . . .

  • Wesley P
    Wesley P 2 месяца назад

    if all these people are dying on the highways the maybe we should be looking at the highways. people may not like it but maybe traffic should be slowed to a max speed of 35MPH in all zones everywhere. this includes highways. just because you can go faster doesnt mean you should. next laws should be passed to make sure cars cannot exceed 50MPH even if you tried to make them do so. 3rd more laws should be pass stating that anyone driving over 50 should be charged with some form of wreckless endangerment and have their drivers license suspended for at least 1 year, if caught driving without one your car should be impounded indefinitely. all these measures would reduce deaths by a massive amount. sure it would take longer to get places but when the cost of getting there faster is peoples lives its not worth it.
    even driveless cars will sometimes break down. what happens when a circuit controlling the computer in a driverless car fries suddenly while its driving? what if its going 65MPH on a highway? do you still crash at 65mph? will you live? see the same question applies there too. 35MPH has a greater survival rate then 65. 65-70 is basically always death where as 35 normally results in severe, but treatable injuries.

  • thestreetlawyer1
    thestreetlawyer1 2 месяца назад

    Only morons drive while using their phone. Your piloting a 4000 lb missile, act like it.

  • GazzilAussie
    GazzilAussie 3 месяца назад

    Autonomous cars are the future, people need to get over it... Think about the fact that cars can talk to each other, so in a crash situation, almost all cars can avoid, this is a lot faster then humans that don't know where the other cars are going to go e.t.c

  • Donnie Watson
    Donnie Watson 3 месяца назад

    The missing part of this discussion is the fact that any tech in automobiles ends up having greater bugs than anticipated by the engineers, when first introduced on mass.
    I worked on automobiles for 26 years, having only changed careers in the past 2 years. I've seen many safety devices have to run the gauntlet of bugs to manage to outlive the lawsuits created by defective designs.
    All of this is to say, such tech will be excellent until it breaks. The question is, "Will this tech survive long enough to have a level of reliability greater than it's potential liability?"

  • PS2Damon
    PS2Damon 3 месяца назад

    just make the driver accountable for any accidents, they still have control of the car when it's needed

  • AlagomSwede
    AlagomSwede 3 месяца назад

    I'm looking forward to when driver-less cars are more common for the sake of the people who don't like driving. Personally I think I'll never get one as I'm too much of a petrol-head to give up on driving. This pretty much sums up my view:видео.html?t=5m53s

  • This Guy
    This Guy 3 месяца назад +2

    This is just the tip of the iceberg, what's next? Are machines going to decide what I'm allowed to eat as well? Work for me? Put me in bed? Surf the web for me? I couldn't care less about safety if I'm not allowed to be free anymore. Sense of responsibilities will become thing of the past if we keep heading in this direction.
    Good thing where I am there's winter and shittons of snow and ice. Self-driving cars would be rubbish in such conditions. We're not getting any of these officially implemented here for at least a 100 years. Easy.
    And if we ever do before that, I'm leaving country.

    • This Guy
      This Guy 17 дней назад

      I got family out of country, it would actually be rather easy for me to do just that.

    • Dojima Ryotaro
      Dojima Ryotaro 17 дней назад

      Just like everyone left the country when Trump got elected. Right, buddy? Right?

  • Alexander Stollznow
    Alexander Stollznow 3 месяца назад +2

    I completely concur with all that is said in this video. Concerns over how a computer might juggle the choices between, as the thinking goes, it will prioritise when endangering 3rd parties, is unrealistic - i dont suppose any algorithm will be based on 'whom should i kill first?'. It also overlooks the fact that such decisions are already being made, by humans.
    My only concern about autonomous cars is that it will lead to me being excluded from having a right to drive at all, on the basis that you cant trust humans.

    • Alexander Stollznow
      Alexander Stollznow 2 месяца назад +1

      two answers to that:
      a/ because humans need to be able to enjoy their lives, and driving cars is something enjoyed by many.
      b/ by saying "risk so many lives" you are grossly overstating the risks posed by human drivers, to others.
      When you remove deaths in single car accidents where the driver is also the victim, risk takers on motorbikes, and pedestrian deaths which are COMPLETELY preventable by pedestrians not walking in front of cars, then the % of all road deaths caused by an 'other' driver is quite small. Plus, the risk of being killed in a car accident is tiny in first place.
      so, yes, there is a risk in having humans drive cars, but it is a tiny one compared to a range of life's risks, and is entirely justifiable as a legitimate form of life enjoyment. this really is only an issue of importance for safety nazis who care nothing about the broader benefit to society. if avoiding any risk at any price was really worthwhile, then it would be illegal to go on a frivolous drive on the weekend for sightseeing. and we would have 40km/h speed limits on motorways. instead, the vast majority of people are happy to take some risk, in return for pragmatism and life enjoyment.
      lastly, exactly the same tecnological aids which will make driverless cars less risky, can be operational to some extent when cars are piloted, even further reducing the argument for not allowing people to drive cars.

    • OneFourFive
      OneFourFive 2 месяца назад

      So be it, why risk so many lives just because you want turn some steering wheel?

  • Ethan W.
    Ethan W. 3 месяца назад

    Making autonomous cars will take a happiness that many people feel from a car. Think about it- with self-driving cars, there will no longer be need for any sports cars to enjoy. I think that the solution is in the drivers' test don't allow redoes for a set amount of time and make the whole class harder so only qualified drivers get on the road.

  • Enjgine
    Enjgine 3 месяца назад

    BMW testing Teslas standard feature

  • Flo
    Flo 3 месяца назад

    Natürlich ist es ein deutsches Auto.

  • [Insert Name]
    [Insert Name] 3 месяца назад

    I disagree with the example at 1:35. If the vehicles can communicate with each other (which they probably will), than the car would be able to tell the other vehicles to stop or move out of the way or whatever whereas humans can’t send messages to other humans at high speeds.

  • D4NIE3LS BR12
    D4NIE3LS BR12 3 месяца назад

    Brasil onlne

  • Sam Dawkins
    Sam Dawkins 3 месяца назад

    i dont want to be a slave to a machine. just like a prefer to walk than have people carry me i want to be in we want to lose our freedom?

  • Harpy Productions
    Harpy Productions 3 месяца назад +1

    as far as i know most acident can simply by avoided by breaking if you are not speeding over speed limit. so i say. if the car detect that an acident will happen but cant avoid victims, the car should drive itself to make the car driver itself and its passagers be the only victims

  • Ridheesh
    Ridheesh 3 месяца назад

    I'll be 18 next year, will get my driver's license, my generation will be last which will observe both combustion engines, electric engines, self driving and autonomous driving.

  • Chemist
    Chemist 3 месяца назад

    I️ see a few major problems with cars becoming self-driving in the way people are expecting them to.
    What I️ mean by this is, cars shouldn’t become self driving gradually, but all at once. This is easier said than done.
    The problem described in the video, should the car swerve left into an SUV with a family inside or to the right with an elderly man on a motorcycle is a real issue. It wouldn’t be if every car in the situation was self driving. The car behind the semi could talk to the SUV, the SUV could speed up and allow the car to move into the other lane to avoid the collision.
    But making every car on the road self driving all at once would be impossible, for reason one, price, Cars that are self driving are currently 40,000+ USD and some cost more. This puts the affordability at a low. Not everyone could afford a vehicle like that.
    Reason two is stubbornness, people are stubborn in their ways. Many wouldn’t trust the car and would rather drive themselves. This would cause an issue with all the other self driving cars on the road.
    Reason three, when accidents do happen. It doesn’t matter how many times they test and improve the self driving algorithms, there will be errors. No technology is ever completely perfect. There would still be accidents, glitches, miscalculations. Who do we blame for them? The car company? The Owner of the car? The car?!
    These were just a couple of the issues I️ see with self driving cars. Just my opinion though.

  • Danjal Veskandar
    Danjal Veskandar 3 месяца назад

    What should the car do when faced with choosing between two bad options? Communicate with the self-driving vehicles to both sides to have them become a variable rather than a static in the equation.

  • Mark Chester
    Mark Chester 3 месяца назад

    Or just hear me out guys ,We could pay attention to the road when we're behind the wheel 🤤🤤🤤I know the thought of that is just unthinkable

  • DrewEmc2
    DrewEmc2 3 месяца назад

    Don't buy into this, people and animals getting hit by autonomous cars everyday

    SNORKYMEDIA 3 месяца назад

    americans dont worry about shooting each other - why are they worried about this?

  • the Sun
    the Sun 3 месяца назад

    I think its more of trust thing than anything else

  • VitaliUS EN
    VitaliUS EN 3 месяца назад

    thanks for interesting video

  • trottingwolf
    trottingwolf 3 месяца назад

    There is no moral question about what an autonomous car should do in some circumstance. For example the one shown in the clip that questions, "should the car swerve into the motorcycle or SUV." That is not a moral question. If the car is going to get into an accident and there is no place to go that does not cause another accident then the car just drives on into the accident, or bail of hay in this example.
    I have never heard of a situation that really poses a "moral question" because in all the cases I have heard the answer is the car will only avoid the accident it is about to get into if there is a way to avoid it without getting into another accident.
    You might be able to make up some situation where it looks like there is a moral choice, but in the context of a moving car with fractions of a second to make a surprise decision where you knowledge of the situation is not complete, I don't think you can come up with a situation that is not either incredibly rare to the point that's its meaningless in the context of human vs autonomous driving safety, or the answer is that if you are in a situation where you can't get out then you can't get out and there is nothing you or a computer can do about it.

  • friendsofthepenan
    friendsofthepenan 3 месяца назад

    I think insurance premiums will usher in the inevitable autonomous vehicle era whatever happens. I don't agree that the moral dilemma questions are a distraction. Accelerating the uptake of self-driving cars does not get around the question of how to program the software to respond in a no win scenario. The decision has to be made ahead of time that is the difficult part.

  • uberteen999
    uberteen999 3 месяца назад

    That would cost a lot of money

  • Gabriel francis
    Gabriel francis 3 месяца назад

    1:33 I imagine that scenario would be difficult for a human too

  • Adam J
    Adam J 3 месяца назад

    It is not a moral dilemma. It is just an add disguised as knowledge.

  • William Wesemann
    William Wesemann 3 месяца назад

    c'mon, what about tesla?!
    I don't like BMW
    sorry BMW fans.

  • DJosephWells
    DJosephWells 3 месяца назад

    No more parking tickets, ill just blame my car.

  • Sailor Barsoom
    Sailor Barsoom 3 месяца назад

    Thank. You.
    I keep seeing all these videos and reading all the articles (and the comment sections are worse) about swerving into a wall, thus killing the driver, swerving into three pedestrians, or hitting a school bus (or other BS scenarios).
    How many people reading this have a driver's license? Did you take a written test? Did the test ask if you were willing to kill yourself to avoid hitting one pedestrian? Did the test ask if you were willing to kill one pedestrian in order to spare a busload of children? Whether you would choose to hit a doctor or a nun? One child or fifty kittens?! ANSWER ME!!!
    I suspect that your written exam had no such questions.

  • zippy
    zippy 3 месяца назад +13

    There will not be self driving cars wide spread for 50 years. We just don't have the tech. to do it safely and wont for a long time. Get over it.

    • Simboiss
      Simboiss 20 дней назад

      Well, yes, the switching argument makes sense. For where I live, it means 3-4 months of switching it off. That would greatly reduce the attractiveness of the feature. Just like any other "advanced" feature in a car, only a minority of people, and rich ones who don't care about coughing extra money, would actually buy the option.

    • Amethyst Espeon
      Amethyst Espeon 20 дней назад +1

      It is very close. They literally just showed it in the video. If people use it like Cruise Control, I can't see how it would have to learn how to drive in heavy weather. Besides, most *people* don't know how to drive in many of those circumstances. It's like saying that the elevator has to be able to autonomously use itself where it needs to go during a fire/earthquake. These cars aren't fully autonomous, they would allow drivers to take control. So when you're in those conditions, then just take control. But when you're coming home from college after a full day of finals after an allnighter, being able to turn on autopilot and relax sounds like a better idea than making that person drive themselves (I know going on the road either way is a bad idea, but people still do it.)

    • Simboiss
      Simboiss 21 день назад

      Yeah, sure, but for driving right now, the technology isn't there.

    • Burkutace27
      Burkutace27 21 день назад

      You want proof? Your proof is in the millions of computer systems that manage mission critical infrastructure and systems (power stations, hospitals, autopilots) 24/7 without fault.
      Computers are better at driving than humans can ever be; they don't get distracted, they don't drive when impaired, they can make 1000s of adjustments to the controls by the time it takes a person to think "Hmm, should I go a bit slower?"

  • Stikbot Studios!
    Stikbot Studios! 3 месяца назад

    One problem... Hackers..... Hackers can hack the cars and cause the cars to crash, so pretty much with these instead of insurance, you need anti viruses

  • Evan Tigchelaar
    Evan Tigchelaar 3 месяца назад

    In this situation, the car should swerve left. The person(s) in the car have more protection than the person in the motorcycle.

  • that guy
    that guy 3 месяца назад

    The problem is it can be hacked and crashed on purpose.

  • Akeria Rivers
    Akeria Rivers 3 месяца назад

    I hate self-Driving cars they can probably have a car crash

  • Mark Schultz
    Mark Schultz 3 месяца назад

    I think there should be a lane in every highway for self driving cars and I think self driving cars should talk to each other and have a design to stick together and reduce friction

  • joeashbubemma
    joeashbubemma 4 месяца назад

    It's interesting that libs blame PEOPLE (94% human error) for collisions, yet blame guns for shootings. Instead of banning vehicles, they seek to remove human control. There's some disconnect with logic and reason here. How many deaths are acceptable with autonomous vehicles? When (not if), there's a major malfunction and people die, libs will justify it as part of the growing pains of technology. I don't have a problem with this tech, just apply your liberal logic consistently. All I hear from leftists is utter hypocrisy. It's not "life" they care about, it's total control over society. THIS is why the people need guns.

    • Sailor Barsoom
      Sailor Barsoom 3 месяца назад

      When somebody invents a gun that can decide for itself whether or not to shoot somebody, that comparison will make sense. Not until.
      Though now that I think about it, there are guns which will refuse to fire for anybody but the gun's owner. Conservatives are against them.

  • consuetudinary
    consuetudinary 4 месяца назад

    An exceedingly weak clip: Comparing airplanes with cars? A comparison of incommensurables. There are lots of reviews online showing how these cars are currently failing to even stay in their lane. If you wish to make them available, you should program them so that they can react immediately to numberless complex situations on the highway. Yes, humans make errors, but a sane person will not rely on vehicles built by the same humans who make errors! A long way to go...

  • TheScape55
    TheScape55 4 месяца назад

    Let people get themselves killed, there's no moral dilemma about the lives being lost every year. People die, it happens, it's going to happen, it will always happen. We've fucked our environment enough and our massive 7.6billion population isn't helping, let's not find ways to increase it. Sure 30,000 sounds like a lot, but it's ultimately negligible; like a star fading away in a sea of stars. There's already more humans alive today than at any other point in history and we're safer than we've ever been and live longer than we ever have. We've already found a million ways to save ourselves from getting wiped out of the gene pool and allowing nature to balance the population, we don't need to keep coming up with new ways to keep us around. Our planet's inhabitants need less of us around, not more.

  • George K.
    George K. 4 месяца назад

    GOD DAMN IT!! I want to become a car designer and next year i am moving to italy to study industrial design there... if this does happen, although i see a lot of 'errors' in it, it will totally affect my future.

  • Le F
    Le F 4 месяца назад

    I would say it's taking longer because of the same reason large corporations bought out better improvement devices to their vehicles because they will be losing out on those big fat pay checks. Not to mention far too many people have proven they like to act like a fool behind the wheel of a car. No more street racing, no more burning tires in the neighborhood are you serious?

  • Marshall Curtis
    Marshall Curtis 4 месяца назад

    The ethical conundrum that we face with autonomous vehicles is this:
    1...When the machine cannot handle the situation, it beeps an alarm and the human takes over. Fine!
    2...And win the human fails to handle the situation (distracted, etc.), then the machine takes over. Fine!
    3...But what happens if both (wo)man AND machine fail at once? Not so fine!

  • Walking Nightmare
    Walking Nightmare 4 месяца назад +1

    I'm not buying this product or taking part in any self driving car technology I will drive myself.

    • Sailor Barsoom
      Sailor Barsoom 3 месяца назад +1

      Walking Nightmare, I hope that you do not turn out to be a Driving Nightmare.

  • Cosmic Potato
    Cosmic Potato 4 месяца назад

    Everything is what you think it is

  • PGTMR2
    PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

    Why is there always somebody working so hard on these "brilliant" ideas, when all they've come up with, in the end, is another scheme to restrict someone else, to infringe on someone else, aaand there's no other way about it, we must take away everyone's ability to drive themselves? Once they've decided, everyone else must go along or they're evil and don't care about others.
    Go back to the drawing board until you've got something that can work with people. Maybe then unleash it on society with the full force of the law behind it? Completely padded cars inside and out would probably also save lives, but we don't do that because, why? Aerodynamics? Vanity? We don't wear HANS collars with helmets either in the name of safety. What gives? We know those things save lives.
    There's money to be made, a lobbyist working on a politician, a politician working on legislation, or just plain handed something made by the company that wants to change the rules and profit. Are there "anti-Skynet," "Robocop directives," standardized and built in yet? OBDIII will try NOT to kill you? Maybe? I think you'll only end up with soft headed brain dead folks that can't take care of one more thing themselves, and we'll all have to rely on less than ideal self driving cars, won't be able to undo it either. Please please please just get a bus pass.

    • PGTMR2
      PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

      They do have errors and failures. Stephen King's Christine is a very real possibility if the car doesn't realize it has a glitch.

    • PGTMR2
      PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

      ... be cause there's fewer of them.

    • PGTMR2
      PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

      Really? There was no one driving that car... no wonder it crashed.

    • PGTMR2
      PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

      I'm sure the victims whether just a simple collision or with personal injury would like to hear that they're "irrelevant." Thought this was about caring and sharing? Guess it's not after all.

    • PGTMR2
      PGTMR2 4 месяца назад

      We have accidents from self driving cars

  • - SD2 -
    - SD2 - 4 месяца назад

    The problem is, just like being on an airplane, it gets boring. When you keep your eyes on the road, time goes faster.

  • sprfitter1
    sprfitter1 4 месяца назад

    Two things. Would it take over if a driver falls asleep while driving?
    Could the car drive for someone who is disqualified due to medical reasons?

  • GeneralChangOfDanang
    GeneralChangOfDanang 4 месяца назад

    So while I can tell that the truck's load is starting to come loose 30 seconds earlier, I would have to wait for the computer in the car to see it actually start falling out of the truck?

  • charles gibson
    charles gibson 4 месяца назад


  • Hablyhablo Habbo gaming
    Hablyhablo Habbo gaming 4 месяца назад

    No trafic police and no driving license required any more and every thing on control

  • eli dennison
    eli dennison 4 месяца назад

    "A curfew is in effect all cars are shut down until 6am."
    "Unit 61i need this car in front of me disabled on the highway, it's not pulling over for the traffic stop"
    "Let's pull up his driving history, and check his debit/credit transactions to find out his daily routine, and use his GPS on his phone and car to pinpoint his location and set up an ambush."
    "He voted for _____ let's set him on a lower priority in the event of a crash calculation"
    "He is an organ donor, I need his car to malfunction."
    If we give up the control. That means someone gets it.

    • eli dennison
      eli dennison 4 месяца назад

      Effect to be truly autonomous they cannot be 100% efficient.
      They cannot rely souly on sensors to be 100% efficient. That car also needs to be able to calculate other vehicles on the road, know where the most congestion is by that. And plan the rout accordingly.
      To do that you would need a server farm large enough to run that.
      That server would be such a risk to public safety that it would have to be under the control of the department of transportation.
      You would be loosing so much potential to merely limit the cars to photonic, kenetic, and ultrasonic sensors!
      It would be no more efficient then driver operated cars. SAFER .
      But not more efficient.
      To be more efficient each car needs to be accounted for, at all times.
      That is a lot of power is all I'm saying.
      We need to take a step back and look at this subjectivity before going at it full throttle.

    • eli dennison
      eli dennison 4 месяца назад

      Effect they did it with business, marriage, and education so I don't see why a box with wheels is any different.

  • Benson Mathew
    Benson Mathew 4 месяца назад

    Totally agree!

  • William Wolff
    William Wolff 4 месяца назад

    Sorry (to some of you, maybe) but part of the solution is to get rid of motorcycles. I don't understand why anyone likes to ride a motorcycle. But they are dangerous, not only to the people riding them, but also to people in their vicinity. Cars and trucks should (although obviously not must) be driven differently when in the vicinity of a motorcycle than when not. Although a collision between a car (or truck) and a motorcycle almost certainly will result in more severe injury to the motorcycle riders than the car (or truck) riders, the collision (not always, but often, especially at high speeds, e.g., on highways) does cause a loss of control of the car (or truck) resulting in a secondary collision of the car (or truck) with something (car, truck, wall, etc.) that causes more severe injury to the car (or truck) riders than the initial collision did as well as causing injury to the riders in other vehicles in the vicinity and/or pedestrians if present. Freedom (unrestricted) is an enticing idea. But liberty (restricted by effects on others) demands prudence. And motorcycles are not prudent.

  • jim kuan
    jim kuan 4 месяца назад

    Self imposed moral dilemma. There is no moral dilemma. It is just human artificially imposed.

  • Some Guy
    Some Guy 4 месяца назад

    Because once everythu n g we do is conrrolles by the xloud we die

  • Nicholas Scarff
    Nicholas Scarff 4 месяца назад

    I have a 1959 Jaguar. Am I meant to give up driving it because of autonomous cars? It’s gone 58 years and thousands of miles without killing anyone.

  • ERL
    ERL 4 месяца назад

    The most pertinent question of all - do self driving cars let you speed? If you turn off the autopilot in order to speed, then bang go the safety benefits of self driving cars. Everyone wants to speed. People aren't giving that up.

  • bob roger
    bob roger 4 месяца назад

    the moment where self driving cars will be fully integrated, is when artificial intelligence can be programmed in the car because it will think and take better decisions faster than a human.