Comment by XorNot
3 years ago
I'm not sure I agree with this success metric: for one thing, there's plenty of roads any given human can't or won't drive on due to perceived difficulty.
But when I think "autonomous vehicle" I definitely don't think "arbitrarily capable of driving on roads" - I think something capable of navigating well-understood national roads. I don't see any inconsistency with the idea that there'd be "no automation" zones or roads, or that pre-approved travelways for AVs is a failure scenario.
What is the value add of AVs if they are only restricted to well-understood, national roads? Wouldn’t their purpose be better served by high speed trains along those roads instead?
My (and Doctorow’s) definition of AV is so stringent because AVs need to deliver the same value add of regular cars relative to other forms of transportation: i) relatively fast, ii) unscheduled, and most importantly, iii) point-to-point transportation between any two points connected by roads. Trains are bad at iii), decent at ii) if run often enough, and far superior at i). If iii) is off the table, then the relative value add of cars is greatly diminished.