Dumb autonomous cars can save more lives than brilliant ones

Perfect is the enemy of good – RAND Corp think tank


Autonomous cars only need to be good enough to reduce the number of road deaths to be worth permitting: eliminating fatal accidents can wait until later.

That's the result of an analysis from military-industrial complex darling RAND Corporation.

That idea isn't entirely new, since it was put forward by America's National Highway Transportation Safety Administration last year, in a speech that sparked RAND's analysis project.

The organisation set researchers Nidhi Kalra and David Groves on the question, and has announced the result of their work.

The analysis claims that in an America, where the 2016 road toll reached over 35,000 fatalities, if a self-driving car is merely better than a human driver then the technology would save hundreds of thousands of lives over 30 years.

To arrive at that estimate, the researchers modelled two scenarios: allowing autonomous vehicles on the road when they're merely 10 per cent better than humans, versus waiting until “their safety performance is 75 or 90 per cent better than that of average human drivers”.

The headline finding is straightforward: a permissive policy saves more lives, more quickly than stricter policies. That premise seems to hold true no matter how the researchers tweaked their models: “under none of the conditions we explored does waiting for significant safety gains result in fewer fatalities.”

“There is good reason to believe that reaching significant safety improvements may take a long time and may be difficult prior to deployment,” the researchers wrote. “Therefore, the number of lives lost while waiting for significant improvements prior to deployment may be large.”

The study notes that “accurately predicting safety outcomes is fraught with complications because the factors that will govern road safety in the coming decades are impossible to predict given the disruptive nature of the technology”.

The problem is, and always will be, people, because we're more likely to shrug off a road accident as inevitable when it's a human driver, but try to sheet home blame to the presumably-deep-pocketed-and-well-insured maker of a self-driving car.

Tesla, for example, finds itself on the receiving end of a lot of criticism any time one of its cars is involved in an accident.

The report therefore notes “a potentially negative social response to HAV crashes may have profound implications for the technology” adding that “HAVs would still cause many crashes, injuries, and fatalities—albeit fewer than their human counterparts. This may not be acceptable to society … Humans have shown nearly zero tolerance for injury or death caused by flaws in a machine”. ®

Similar topics


Other stories you might like

  • Amazon warehouse staff granted second chance to vote for unionization

    US labor watchdog tosses previous failed result in the trash

    America's labor watchdog has given workers at Amazon’s warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama, another crack at voting for unionization after their first attempt failed earlier this year.

    “It is ordered that the election that commenced on February 8 is set aside, and a new election shall be conducted,” Lisa Henderson, regional director at the National Labor Relations Board, ruled [PDF] on Tuesday.

    “The National Labor Relations Board will conduct a second secret ballot election among the unit employees. Employees will vote whether they wish to be represented for purposes of collective bargaining by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.”

    Continue reading
  • It's the flu season – FluBot, that is: Surge of info-stealing Android malware detected

    And a bunch of bank-account-raiding trojans also identified

    FluBot, a family of Android malware, is circulating again via SMS messaging, according to authorities in Finland.

    The Nordic country's National Cyber Security Center (NCSC-FI) lately warned that scam messages written in Finnish are being sent in the hope that recipients will click the included link to a website that requests permission to install an application that's malicious.

    "The messages are written in Finnish," the NCSC-FI explained. "They are written without Scandinavian letters (å, ä and ö) and include, for example, the characters +, /, &, % and @ in illogical places in the text to make it more difficult for telecommunications operators to filter the messages. The theme of the text may be that the recipient has received a voicemail message or a message from their mobile operator."

    Continue reading
  • AsmREPL: Wing your way through x86-64 assembly language

    Assemblers unite

    Ruby developer and internet japester Aaron Patterson has published a REPL for 64-bit x86 assembly language, enabling interactive coding in the lowest-level language of all.

    REPL stands for "read-evaluate-print loop", and REPLs were first seen in Lisp development environments such as Lisp Machines. They allow incremental development: programmers can write code on the fly, entering expressions or blocks of code, having them evaluated – executed – immediately, and the results printed out. This was viable because of the way Lisp blurred the lines between interpreted and compiled languages; these days, they're a standard feature of most scripting languages.

    Patterson has previously offered ground-breaking developer productivity enhancements such as an analogue terminal bell and performance-enhancing firmware for the Stack Overflow keyboard. This only has Ctrl, C, and V keys for extra-easy copy-pasting, but Patterson's firmware removes the tedious need to hold control.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021