Old 09-21-22, 01:30 PM
  #19  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Sure "we" can accept a significant reduction in human deaths on the roadways. You got any? - besides a handful of salesmen/promoters/technophiles (and their presumably hired researchers) speculating and guessing about what might happen at some future date with some currently non-existing vehicles with some currently unavailable/non-existing combination of reliable,effective, allweather self driving software/hardware.

Of course there are dreamy predictions coming from promoters promoting a rationale for the dreamy technology they are trying to sell to investors and speculators.
The technology doesn't exist yet... so no, I cannot tell you of any such statistics. But hey, we cannot tell you how many cyclists are injured by motor vehicles and how, either, because that data isn't collected or reported. (death stats are, injury stats are not)

But the question that was being discussed is: "How much of an reduction in deaths would it take to make AV technology more acceptable than human drivers?"

Care do delve into that?
Or are you just going to dismiss the hypothetical question based on your perception that such technology will never exist?
genec is offline