The self-driving car.. For these reasons, we will not see it soon on our streets

The controversy of self-driving cars has resurfaced after several initial trials revealed that they may not be as safe as their manufacturers claim, but rather that they may make traffic worse.

In a report published by the American newspaper "washingtonpost", author David Zipper said that the volatile expectations about the self-driving car industry have left investors and enthusiasts of this technology in a state of frustration.

In 2016, Ford announced the introduction of self-driving taxis by 2021, and Lyft announced the resumption of a program to make a self-driving car, but these companies did not deliver on their promises.

At the Consumer Electronics Show in January, General Motors, Chinese automaker Geely and self-driving car developer Mobileye promised consumers that they would be able to buy their self-driving cars by 2024.

At the moment, there are no self-driving cars available for purchase this year (even if Tesla "misleadingly" described - according to the newspaper - its driver assistance system as "completely self-driving").

Is the collective use of autonomous vehicles a danger to society?

And what is its purpose?

Despite investing more than $100 billion in self-driving cars over the past decade, many doubts remain.

Like cars, autonomous vehicles did not arise from a need, but rather as a result of technological opportunities.

Phil Koopman, professor of engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, believes that the creation of self-driving cars was not intended to solve some social problem.

Competition for a self-driving car has intensified among private companies, although there is no clear reason for its existence.

A prototype of Uber that killed a pedestrian on a street in Arizona in 2018 (French)

Google and the Misleading Promise

In 2007 Google hired Stanford Team Leader Sebastian Thrun to launch a new self-driving car initiative that would later form the basis of the company known as Waymo.

Google plans to spread its technology on public roads, claiming that the primary goal of self-driving cars is to ensure safety.

In a blog post published in 2010, the company highlighted the 1.2 million annual deaths caused by traffic accidents worldwide, noting that it believed its car would be able to cut that huge number, perhaps by half.

This vision was widely welcomed, which led some companies to follow in Google's footsteps and cite safety as the reason for their self-driving cars.

The US National Traffic Safety Administration has published a note stating that human error (along with other factors, such as poor road engineering or dangerous vehicle design) is the main cause of 94% of traffic crashes.

Recognizing the gains from the industry, the self-driving car makers have kept this number in mind while marketing their products.

These companies claim that self-driving cars will reduce accidents caused by drunk or drowsy driving, but the machine-learning system flaws in those cars will inevitably lead to mistakes that human drivers don't make.

Phil Koopman asserts that a few years ago the autonomous driving system was unable to distinguish yellow.

Koopman believes that the safety controversy is exaggerated because “there is no evidence if autonomous vehicles will be safer than human drivers in the short to medium term,” noting that “machine learning technology still suffers from many shortcomings, especially when it gets in the way.” unfamiliar bodies.

Self-driving car mistakes are fatal

Initial experiments revealed that mistakes made by self-driving cars are fatal;

An Uber prototype hit and killed Elaine Herzberg when she was crossing a street in Arizona with her bike in 2018. As a result, the governor of Arizona suspended Uber's ability to test her vehicle, and two years later The company sold its car to a startup known as Aurora.

Compounding the safety arguments is the question of whether car companies will design self-driving vehicles to break traffic laws.

Tesla was forced by the federal government to collect all of its vehicles after it deliberately programmed them to move slowly through stop lights instead of coming to a complete stop.

And if the goal is to ensure road safety, there are already plenty of technologies available that automakers can invest in, rather than striving to create fully autonomous cars;

Such as advanced driver assistance systems, automatic emergency braking and pedestrian detection.

Such systems have already been shown to help save lives, but their capabilities vary greatly from one model to another.

The writer stresses that some of the other proposed benefits of self-driving cars are questionable.

In terms of boosting employee productivity by allowing them to take work calls and submit memos while on the road, this hypothesis is unlikely, especially since one study found that only 1 in 4 drivers want to work on the go.

Google has appointed Sebastian Thrun to launch a new initiative for the self-driving car that will later form the basis of the company known as Waymo (Reuters)

As for the extent to which self-driving cars can expand transportation options for those with visual or mobility impairments, this hypothesis is likely to be applicable in rural areas, but in cities and suburbs people can call a taxi.

The author touched on an argument that autonomous vehicles could help combat climate change.

“This technology can be sustainable if we make sure that autonomous vehicles reduce the use of fossil fuels,” says Tara Andringa, CEO of Partners for Automated Vehicle Education.

Even if self-driving cars were electric, those extra miles you'd go to avoid traffic would be disastrous for the environment.

Whether they run on batteries or gasoline, all cars produce emissions, from brake dust to friction between tires, and the manufacture of electric vehicles is expanding the carbon footprint.

According to the author, if the world is serious about tackling climate change, promoting transit and cycling instead of driving is more effective than any type of car, whether self-driving, electric or otherwise.

The author warns that the use of self-driving cars will be more dangerous in cities.

Without a restrictive policy such as a vehicle mileage tax or decongestion pricing, already congested streets can become overcrowded, especially if self-driving car owners avoid paying parking fees by programming their cars to roam nearby streets while sitting in one restaurants.

The author adds that advocates of self-driving car technology have not failed to use the global competition between China and the United States as an argument in support of this technology, and have continued to urge the enactment of legislation that protects it, but global competition alone appears as an insufficient justification to allow the unrestricted civilian use of technology that can reduce quality of life.

Given the danger that autonomous cars pose to the future, government officials should carefully monitor new developments in this technology and be ready to step in at any time to defend the public interest.