– Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Don’t Collide With an Autonomous Vehicle, Because It Will Be Your Fault

Soon we will live in a world where AI-controlled vehicles will be perfect, and any collision between such a vehicle and a human-controlled vehicle (motorcycle or otherwise) will be the fault of the human. Oh, wait … we already live in that world.

According to a report on, on December 7 a collision between an autonomous vehicle (AV) and a motorcycle resulted in a finding that the motorcyclist was at fault. If you are interested, you can read all of the details on Visor Down.

Suffice it to say that properly designed, programmed and operating AVs will, essentially, never be found at fault in a collision with a vehicle operated by a human being. The sensors on the AV will record information that can be recalled, and presented, in court, if necessary. That information will prove that the AV was operating in conformance with law, and the human-operated vehicle was not.  Sounds great, doesn’t it?

Of course, likely ignored will be the fact that AVs could be hacked, have a hardware malfunction, or simply fail to pick up on cues that humans can perceive and machines cannot (such as making eye contact, or even evaluating a facial expression, with another driver/rider).

When Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking and others warn about the perils of an AI future, maybe this is how it starts.  What do you think?

See more of MD’s great photography:



  1. Asphanaut says:

    Anybody tried to go through the automated checkout line at the grocery or big-box hardware store? Yeah, it’s like that. Except with a 1000x more parameters to process and live at stake. So, AV’s? No, thanks.

  2. Mark says:

    I can’t wait for autonomous cars. Going down the highway they will all be in the right lane doing the speed limit. And won’t that be wonderful.

  3. kyle says:

    I see them driving here in Mountain View and Los Altos California and even though the idea scares the hell out of me, I have never seen one do anything weird besides the autonomous Uber running the ped crosswalk in SF on video. And I do a lot of driving in the area for my job. I see at least a few a day. They even know when to go on a 4 way stop which is impressive. As long as nobody hacks them and controls them I think they will be alright.

    But per the SF example, instances like that would only happen once before a programmer takes note and makes it right, vs humans making that mistake on a daily basis and not correctable like it would be to 1000’s of autonomous cars that get their software updated with the memo.

    Edit: They have drivers inside to assist. I have not seen one without a person inside.

    • mickey says:

      since I have personally never seen one, and they are highly unlikely to put them wehre I live, and you say you have not seen one without a person inside…does the person have to pay attention as if he were driving, and does he have his own set of controls that he is not allowed to use except in case of an emergency?

      If so I don’t see how this is much different than the current safety features that keep you from drifting lanes, or running up on someone on cruise control, or backing out in front of someone, or slamming on the brakes when someone or something stops or crosses in front of you

  4. Rapier says:

    While the liability issues of autonomous road vehicles is a huge deal this example is wrong. Such vehicles will be found liable you can be sure. The real liability issue is if the liability will fall to the manufacturers as opposed to the owner or occupant/assistant or whatever you call it. Here you can be sure that the manufacturers will eventually be granted freedom from liability in almost all cases.

    Auto manufactures like all large international corporations have tremendous political power and only the willfully naive believe this does not flow down past legislative bodies into courts. Which is why the ‘rights’ of corporations expand relentlessly to the point where they are now essentially sovereign. Admittedly sovereignty is a concept few grasp. Dabbled in mostly by the stupid.

    Soon enough two autonomous vehicles will have a crash and somebody will be found liable. It won’t be the manufacturers.

  5. Phil says:

    There’s never been a perfect machine. Autonomous vehicles won’t be perfect either (the industry snake oil salesmen will try and tell you they will be of course).
    I’ve spent 35 years working in the field of automated process control, and autonomous cars scare the hell out of me.

  6. Norm G. says:

    Q: What do you think?

    A: i think we’re going to hell on a shutter.

    these pseudo intellectuals even think they’re going to automate 80,000lb lorrys. no what’s going to happen is they’re going to get alot of people killed, maybe even you, me, or a loved one. in their greed and rapaciousness (which is what it is) they’re hoping to remove human beings – and their associated labor cost – from the equation. the idea of SAFETY is but the “cover story”, a “rationale”, or “alibi” that’s being trotted out to obscure the true intent. only problem is they’ve never stopped to consider if it’s even realistic, and what NEW costs will be incurred (hint costs aren’t always monetary).

    sure the human mind can conceptualize ALOT of things, unfortunately it’s not a foregone conclusion that we can do all of them. as you’ve heard me state before, mankind has “conceptualized” a cure for the common cold, a cure for cancer, fusion at room temperature, and world peace, but notice how despite many decades and many dollars spent we’ve yet to achieve any of it.

    at least in the context of AI being applied to Class 8 vehicles, what we’re seeing here is a historical repeat of the 1993 Jurassic Park “genius/ignorance model” where great INTELLIGENCE and great STUPIDITY manages to occupy the same space at the same time. now this may seem counter-intuitive but it’s actually not, this is more commonly known as Ego, and we’ve seen this movie…

  7. dt 175 says:

    didn’t john connor teach us to smash those metal em-en-effers into junk?

  8. Crazyjoe says:

    I’m getting older. My eyes and reflexes are not that good as they were so I welcome all the assist I can get. My next car will be a assisted even if I have downsize my expectations on other things. A recent review Suzuki had a great electronics package that comes at a cost. Unfortunately they only appear on top level bikes. Antilock brakes are still an option on bikes for me at least I won’t get a bike without them. It helps to have good brakes to. And why can’t they build anything with decent headlights.

    Speaking of which my first car with anti lock brakes was a 1986 Ford with useless headlights. Why is it taking so long for bikes to fully adopt them?

  9. Bob K says:

    There are only 2 good reasons I can come up with for me being in an autonomous vehicle.
    1. I can use 2 hands to reload.
    2. Finally being able to hold a steady speed and course while receiving a BJ.

    • Bob K says:

      In all seriousness, to say that a vehicle with AI will never be at fault is ridiculous. A lot of scenarios can be played out when coming up with the programming. But not every scenario can ever be thought of. I don’t think these vehicles have to the ability to predict events, only react to data acquired.

      • Norm G. says:

        re: “I don’t think these vehicles have to the ability to predict events, only react to data acquired.”

        correct, the human mind is still the heavy weight champ of supercomputers. though it’s understandable how one might not think this depending on who we encounter on any given day.


        • Tank says:

          “the human mind is still the heavy weight champ of supercomputers”- until it gets old, drunk, or distracted (sometimes all of the above). People die every minute because of the human mind’s limitations and inability to process information as fast as Watson.

          • Norm G. says:

            re: “People die every minute because of the human mind’s limitations and inability to process information”

            yup and that’s why the best use of this technology is as an EXTENSION of human ability. it’s not to be interpreted by the foolish as a WHOLESALE SUBSTITUTION for human ability.

            tell you what, afaik all Boeing aircraft since the 747 (circa 1969) to the 787 of 2017 have had some form of AUTOLAND feature, so when you’ve got the stones to board that commercial flight without it’s CAPTAIN or FIRST OFFICER you let me know.

            Q: why…?

            A: cause i want to be the one who either takes you to, or picks you up from the airport.

            (disclaimer: we’d better limit that to me just taking you TO the airport)

    • Doc says:

      I thought cruise control was the answer for #2.

  10. Dino says:

    The problem with trying to make something idiot-proof, is underestimating the power of complete idiots!

  11. Orphan of the Road says:

    As an old man I remember NASA’s engineers complete lack of respect for the astronauts. But it was John Glenn and Gus Grisom with a pencil and paper which saved the lives of astronauts in a critical emergency the “smartest guys in the room” and their computers couldn’t figure out.

    They tried to make Gus Grisom into a coward because of their faulty engineering. Eventually their smug confidence resulted in the death of three great men on the launch pad.

    Something to consider with this news, eh?

    Take a trip with me in 1967
    With Grissom, White, and Chaffee on a rocket ride to heaven
    A dead-end date aboard AS-204
    It was American made
    Only the best for our boys
    And we were rockin’ at the T-Dance
    Rockin’ at the T-Dance

  12. redbirds says:

    Everything about modern life makes me glad that I’m “advanced in years”.

  13. silver says:

    Everyone is ignoring the more important question!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    How much longer will motorcycles be on the road?

    • Grover says:

      You’ll probably have to resort to riding like the “Black Knight”: You hop on your bike ( preferably a performance machine) at midnight and speed through the streets over 140 mph racing in and out through the AV vehicles and police cars and then post your escapades on YouTube. When you’re done with your “ride” you’ll shut off your engine and headlight and roll silently into your garage and quickly close the door. Police won’t be far behind, though as every camera equipped AV car will report the I speeding vehicle to the authorities and you’ll be nabbed in no time. Better enjoy riding as much as you can now because the end is near:)

    • Dino says:

      Join the AMA. As a member, you can see all they do, the legislation they are watching, and what they are still fighting (High Ethanol mandates, AI cars, laws taking away areas to ride off road (and in some cases, on public roads).
      Eye opening. Sounds like a Shameless plug, but this is right in their wheelhouse.
      American Motorcyclist Association.

  14. mickey says:

    so, in the AI world of cars….if you took big cardboard boxes, and placed them in each lane on the expressway. Would all traffic come to a permanent halt because no one would be there to move the boxes out of the way? lol

    • Grover says:

      My wife’s 2017 Subaru slams its brakes on for small tumbleweeds and plastic grocery bags that float across the highway in the driver’s path. It can’t distinguish those harmless items from a real hazard. Very dangerous for you and the driver behind who has to react to you sudden stopping in the middle of the desert. The technology is called “Eyesight” and sometimes your better off without it IMHO. There is a button to disable it and you have to disable it every time you get in the car. It the future and ain’t it grand?

      • Norm G. says:

        re: “There is a button to disable it and you have to disable it every time you get in the car.”

        building our terminator robots with an OFF BUTTON, what a crazy concept…? 🙂

        now if only the writers of the software that MD uses
        (that basically auto sends everybody and their nana’s comment to moderation) had the foresight to include such a feature.

        garbage in =’s garbage out. it does beg the question how does software written/created by man in the first place (and would not exist otherwise) overlook such a thing.

      • Curly says:

        I rather enjoy the Eyesite features in my 2017 Subaru. The adaptive cruise is a great help on the highway and it is amazing tech but you are right that there’s no reason we should absolutely trust our lives to autonomous electronics. There are situations and places that it will not replace human senses. Because of that I believe that widespread adoption of fully autonomous cars will be a long time I coming if ever in all areas.

    • Norm G. says:

      Q: Would all traffic come to a permanent halt because no one would be there to move the boxes out of the way?

      A: yes.

  15. Dave says:

    The really interesting consideration here might be the number of games that human vehicle operators will be able to play against autonomous vehicles that are forced to abide by canned programing.

    • Bart says:

      Dave gets it!
      Sorta like when on my bike I pull up alongside a Volvo with a nasty little dog in the window, in the driver’s blind spot, and I start “barking” at the dog. Dog goes nuts, driver doesn’t know I’m there, reaches around to swat the dog while driving. Big fun.

    • Dino says:

      It is already a game with Human drivers, that are on “autopilot” these days, with distracted driving and such..
      I drive enough miles, local and interstate, and I can spot other drivers on “visual cruise control”. That is when someone just subconsciously locks on to another car in another lane (usually in that cars blind spot) and just sits there. speeds up and slows down with them, not even aware that they are doing it, or don’t care. Mostly not aware that they are in someone else’s blind spot. You can avoid, and shake these bad drivers easy enough, once you know their “programming”.
      Just like the AI cars. Like Dave said, once we figure out their programming, it will be a lot easier to deal with.
      As a side note, I think I have bought my LAST new car. It was a 2005, has a couple air bags and ABS. That is enough for me!

  16. Tank says:

    Humans do a lousy job of driving. I think AVs are a good thing.

    • thrus says:

      Overall I agree but the issue is that many will say they are better then the computer so refuse to use them. some of those will be good drivers others will not be.

      Personally I will wait to see a automated running here in MI in the snow with no lines or even pavement visible and how they decide on when to brake for black ice areas? For example my road for some damn reason the city plows last so it is not uncommon for me to have days where there is 4 inches of snow on the road and a few tracks through it, then the stop sign has crap there that the plows threw when they plowed the cross road so if you actually come to a full stop at the sign you will not get moving again except backwards maybe, or you can try the other direction (shorter) and try to accelerate from a stop on a snowy/icy hill. This all ignores that the cars get snow built up on the back of them likely covering any sensors just by driving so is it going to stop and expect the human to get out and clean it on a 70 mph road? there are just to many winter questions that I have not seen answered, but they look to be nice if you live down south where everything shuts down for a snow day anyhow.

      • RyYYZ says:

        Yep, until AVs have shown that they can deal with the variety of challenging conditions and unexpected events that even the average, poor, human driver seems to take in stride, I don’t think they’re ready for prime-time. Snow covered roads, dependency on sensors that can be easily blocked. Heck, even (apparently) roads with lane markings that are faded give these things fits. The software can only deal with what it has been programmed to deal with, and lacks even the lick of common sense of the average (poor) driver

  17. jon says:

    I’ve gotta say, I think the conclusions about ‘AI always being right’ being drawn from this particular collision, are a little unwarranted.
    From what I can tell the biker moved into a lane that was only part vacated, and the car had to move back to avoid colliding with another car. Seems like a human car driver might have had to do exactly the same thing under the same circumstances, and the biker would rightfully been at fault.

    It’s a long stretch to go from the quite possibly correct outcome in one case, to ‘humans are always to blame’, even though it might jive with many people’s concerns about AI.

  18. OldGuy says:

    So when, as is inevitable, one of these things crashes into a wall or a parked car etc. who will be (legally) at fault? The person in the car, the person who programmed it, or the manufacturer ?
    If you’re in one of these, are you meant to be sitting there ready to take over as/when it gets into trouble (as Tesla currently say you must be)?

    • thrus says:

      I can say that I will never buy one that I have to take over for, it is pointless to have as I am expected to be aware all the time like driving but my focus will wane and i will stop doing it. If the makers don’t think this will happen they are either stupid or actively ignorant.

      The best cases for the self driving are business people that are in the car all the time visiting clients, they will start trusting the car and spending 8 hours a day traveling around likely 4+ in the car their attention while sitting will decrease as after a month that is 120 hours paying attention to nothing, 6 months latter it is 720 hours of nothing, if you think they are not going to be pulling out paperwork prepping for the next meeting you are delusional. They either sit still prepping and lose time or they do it while driving and get an extra meeting in a day. Argue that sitting is what they do now, and their boss will say the more expensive care was supposed to improve productivity as they had no accidents the last 3 years so it can’t improve safety.

      • Norm G. says:

        re: “If the makers don’t think this will happen they are either stupid or actively ignorant.”

        the answer is C, both answers A and B.

    • Norm G. says:

      Q: So when, as is inevitable, one of these things crashes into a wall or a parked car etc. who will be (legally) at fault? The person in the car, the person who programmed it, or the manufacturer ?

      A: the manufacturer…

      product liability laws and the associated lawyers teams looking to profit ain’t going anywhere.

  19. Bill says:

    I guess we can all move to a third world country with bad roads.

    • MxPhlipper says:

      Or Louisiana!!!

    • Bart says:

      I can’t imagine how one would code an AI car for baja to dodge all the bad cars, TJ traffic, no stop/tail lights, sketchy passes, rolling Altos, giant potholes, trucks that blink LT for a pass, etc.

      Worse yet, when somebody writes code for Latino or Chineese driving culture and that gets put on cars sent to the USA! But I suppose the car will “know” which side of the border it is on and will change its driving habits from good to boraccho.

  20. hh says:

    This is new stuff to me. I wonder what happens when folks know the parameters of what will stop an autonomous car? Will you ever be able to back up in a crowded parking lot if everyone knows you can safely walk behind an AI car because it will stop. Will J-walking stop traffic? Or what would a shopping cart or debris do to a highway or someone who decided to walk across the highway. How are the parameters going to be set for preserving human life.

    • Dino says:

      In the legalities of programming a 4,000 pound piece of steel (well, silicone and plastic) I would assume that preservation of human life will always prevail.
      So that means, J-walking will be easy (all cars will just stop for you). Any traffic problems will slow down as needed, etc.. Just go ahead and walk (or bicycle) anywhere you want.
      Areas of Chaos, like cities, will likely move slower, but “safer”. Controlled areas, like a nice clean highway, could move faster (in ideal conditions, they could drive really close if they are all talking to each other, just like one long single car).
      But the Chaos will be hard to overcome, and might actually kill the AI as they propose it now. Also, as others have mentioned, what about bad road conditions? If the lines on the road are faded, covered in snow, or otherwise go missing, what then? unless they plant feeder wires in the pavement to act as rails, it will have to fall back to some other technology, or else the human will have to wake up and drive! I could see AI cars getting their own “fast lane” to work better, and maybe they never leave those lanes in the future. And just wait until the Hackers start playing in traffic (literally)!!
      Fasten your seatbelts, the captain says we are in for some bumpy air ahead!!!

      • Norm G. says:

        re: “Fasten your seatbelts, the captain says we are in for some bumpy air ahead!!!”

        wait, what captain…?

        “having been upgraded with Cyberdyne computers this airline’s been flying fully unmanned with a perfect operational record…” (7-time Mr. Olympia accent)

    • Onto says:

      It will be great for anybody with criminal intentions. See a car coming on a quiet road and then walk out in front of it, and you could be sure that it will stop for you. Then you can rape, rob or kill the occupants. The AI car will make it possible.

  21. Grover says:

    Giving up control seems to be the big plan for the future. Where does it all end?

    • Norm G. says:

      Q: Where does it all end?

      A: in the collapse of Western Civilization.

      • Scott says:

        Fine, then. It’s going to happen anyway, as long as the humans are in charge…

        • Norm G. says:

          re: “It’s going to happen anyway”

          yes that’s exactly the point. the idea that it can be avoided (when history’s repeatedly shown it cannot) is but another one of man’s “happy go lucky” assumptions. “feel good politics” it’s a thing.

  22. Bart says:

    I have read that the autonomous cars are also programmed to decide how to crash, if it is emminent. Now I don’t trust other people much, so I don’t feel ao great about some geek deciding how I will crash or how I will die. I don’t even like being forced to wear seatbelts………maybe we will not need seatbelts after all the cars are driven by AI!

  23. Don Medeiros says:

    I’m 69 also & feel the same way.

  24. My2cents says:

    What is created by man is still man and therefore failure prone.

  25. David Fisher says:

    I don’t see this as all bad. Last year I was hit broadside by an 88 year old gentleman who was pulling out of a parking lot. As I approached I was making eye contact with a driver who appeared to be making eye contact with me. Well, this old dude must have been looking right through me because he swore he did not see me coming down the road. He was at fault and was was given a ticket. His insurance paid me for the damages and then some. I do have some concerns about how all this will work out in the long run, but I also believe that autonomous vehicles will prevent a lot of accidents caused by distracted drivers and others who have no business behind the wheel. I do a lot of cycling as well and I can assure you that people are just not paying attention to us or anything else outside of their cars.

  26. Ward says:

    The fact is that a lot of vehicle collisions are caused by human error. This is already factored into insurance costs, so automated cars aren’t going to cause insurance rates to go up. What they will do is make it safer to be a pedestrian, bicyclist, motorcyclist, and even another driver. The telemetry data will allow a better determination of fault, getting rid of the he said, she said “evidence” that is typically all we have in most collisions. What is glossed over on the article is the reason “that properly designed, programmed and operating AVs will, essentially, never be found at fault in a collision with a vehicle operated by a human being” is because the human will be the one at fault. Humans will continue to be allowed to drive, but we will be more likely to actually be held responsible rather than what happens currently, with the pathetic and all too common dismissal of culpability due to the collision being “an accident”. I, for one, welcome our new robot car overlords.

    • Provologna says:

      My favorite of many good posts on this thread.

      To eliminate responsibility, they changed the word “crash” to “accident.” Similarly, they changed the noun “drunk” to “alcoholic.” Drunks really are physically addicted to alcohol, because the physical withdrawal symptoms are horrible. But “alcoholism” is the only “disease” that requires the consumption of alcohol to suffer from any symptom.

    • ilikefood says:

      No, self-driving cars won’ “make it safer to be a motorcyclist or another driver”, because once self-driving cars are common, driving on your own will be quickly made illegal. And in the process of getting there we’ll see safety-based arguments: “self-driving cars are so much safer, you are so selfish wanting to drive yourself, you are willing to risk people’s lives for some weird enjoyment of being in control.”

      When self-driving cars are the default, there will be no room for human-driven vehicles.

      • RyYYZ says:

        The way things are going, in our increasingly safety-obsessed societies, the eventual elimination of motorcycles from the roads seemed likely, anyway. Think the “Vision Zero” (or whatever it’s called – aiming for zero road fatalities) crowd are going to stand for people risking their lives like damned fools on 2-wheeled machines with essentially zero “occupant” safety? It doesn’t matter if you don’t mind the risk – you belong to “society” and thus society is entitled to make rules to protect you from yourself.

  27. Brian Phillips says:

    I work as an insurance claims supervisor in California (for over 20 years). I read the article. Of course the vehicle’s maker is denying all liability, just as human drivers do even when they are at fault, but in the real world this will be decided between their respective insurance carriers. This sounds more to me like a situation of comparative liability where neither party is 100% at fault. Having made a movement to leave its lane, the autonomous vehicle provided the motorcyclist the opportunity to enter that lane. Then the autonomous vehicle “changed its mind” just as a human driver would do, but made the wrong decision, apparently unaware of the motorcyclist’s presence. At that point, the autonomous vehicle had some liability as well. There is a California Vehicle Code 21658 that would apply for the car (you can google that), or CVC 22107. The motorcyclist had some liability for entering the lane before it was clear, but I think the car has the majority of liability in my professional opinion, and I make decisions like this every day in my line of work.

    • ApriliaRST says:

      > Of course the vehicle’s maker is denying all liability, just as human drivers do even when they are at fault, but in the real world this will be decided between their respective insurance carriers.

      Except in this case the autonomous vehicle manufacturer will want to set legal precedence and will use its deep pockets to steamroll the motorcyclist and his insurance carrier.

  28. Pat S says:

    What happens when two autonomous vehicles collide. Or when you get rear ended by an autonomous vehicle.

  29. Sentinel says:

    Here’s to the mindlessness of today. Which will only be increasing from here on out. On our way to the final technocratic dystopia of tomorrow.

  30. ApriliaRST says:

    The best thing about autonomous vehicles is that they obey the letter of the law.

    The worst thing about autonomous vehicles is that they obey the letter of the law.

  31. Ed says:

    Maybe the bureaucrats will allow us to ride bicycles. In approved lanes and trails of course.

  32. mickey says:

    I always thought my father died at the right time. The world was getting too advanced for him. He had trouble with fast traffic, expressways confused him, he had a mistrust of computers and cell phones and credit cards or calculators for that matter (he still hand wrote letters or typed them on a typewriter, did all math calucuations with a pencil and paper,only paid for things in cash, rarely went to a restaurant for dinner, and never missed the 6:00 news which was while we ate dinner)

    Wasn’t sure if I was going to be as lucky as him with regards to timing of death, but with regards to AI it looks like it make work out for me after all.

    • Tom R says:

      Your dad sounds a bit like me. I’m am not quite there, but close.

      As such, I will never purchase from Amazon because I fear that they are the real-life manifestation of Big Brother. Am I still considered paranoid if they really are after me?

      • Provologna says:

        It’s not much open to debate that all makers of computer OS and many web software companies sold out to the Feds, allowing the Feds “back door” access to most every computer and every web-connected device.

        When the computer and net companies were busted on this fact, they all attempted to deny and deflect, blaming the Feds, but they openly agreed to cooperate from the start. (Which partly explains why the Feds do not dismantle Google, the most powerful company in world history from the view of command and control of the way people think and act. The other reason is that Google and similar web companies toss money around to keep everyone on their side, similar to the drug cartels building churches in Mexico.)

        Suppose the Feds go to any web company and demand open access to person X’s internet activity, supplying th web company only with a FISA (secret) court order. (The existence of such order is a secret, which if disclosed, is a major felony.)

        It is a major felony for the web company to make the above news public or to notify their subject client. Anyone who violates this law shall do many years hard time in prison.

        A certain few web companies publish a monthly announcement that “we have not had to enforce any FISA court warrants” or similar announcement. The month they do not make such announcement, their clients can and do know that they are subject to Federal surveillance, and can act accordingly.

    • Norm G. says:

      re: “he had a mistrust of computers and cell phones and credit cards or calculators for that matter”

      all of that’s the “demon technology”.

  33. Neil says:

    People make so many mistakes driving. Not everyone SHOULD drive. The elderly. Teens. Drunks and drug users. So AI will be better than they are so I’m not worried. I see sooo many rear end crashes now. Just STU-PID! We should not drive any longer than we have to. Let the computers choose the route and maybe have it take us to a class once every month to drive the car ourselves on an off road track someplace, just so we know HOW to drive.

  34. Norm G. says:

    re: “on December 7 a collision between an autonomous vehicle (AV) and a motorcycle resulted in a finding that the motorcyclist was at fault.”

    a date which will LIVE IN INFAMY…!!! (Norm imitating FDR voice)

  35. downgoesfraser says:

    Just a thought, but thinking that when autonomous vehicles are the majority in 20 years, or so, the insurance cost of a human driven vehicle will be so high that very few will be able to afford it. Get thee to a race track.

    • cpsseals says:

      My computer is faster than your computer!!!

    • Chris says:

      That is exactly the point. I have seen various interviews with AV proponents, and all say the same thing. AV vehicles work on the same system of logic. The ‘problem’ becomes a vehicle operated by a human, who works on his/her individual logic system. Bottom line, they want human hands off the wheel (and handlebars). We will lose the ‘privilege’ of driving, by decree, or as downgoes suggests, by being priced out of the driver’s seat, or the saddle. And by the by, ain’t gonna be no autonomous motorcycles. If, by some quirk of science they come up with an ‘AM,” who the hell wants to ride shotgun, anyway? I’m 69. Hope I die first.

      • HM says:

        Not as old as you but 60 now.Most of my life I heard statements such as,”oh to be young again” or “I wish that I was 20 again”.It could be the groups I am in? I don’t think so.And what I hear now is,”I wish that I was older” and “I surely don’t want to be any younger in these times”.Hopefully I’ll die first or government subsidies will stop on all of this advancement!

    • Dino says:

      Yeah, but the racetrack is busy, developing robot race pilots (see Yamaha article)

    • Jason says:

      My thoughts as well. Human driving won’t be banned. It will just be priced out of reach for the vast majority of people.

wordscape cheatgun mayhem 2 unblocked games