In our last blog entry, we went through all the reasons why we believe that Driverless Transportation truly is sure-fire technology and why we are confident we will see Autonomous Vehicles within the next 10 years.
To be equitable, we need to think about the other side. As we pointed out last time, a number of “can’t miss” technologies never really made it. In this blog, we’ll take the negative perspective and look at reasons why it perhaps won’t make it.
- Crash!!!
- Safety - A bad accident happens and people get scared
- A bad crash does not happen but sensational headlines scare people anyway. (Take a look at driverless headlines like “Driverless Car kills 4 year old boy” and “Woman run over by Driverless Car”.)
When Karl Benz came out with the first modern automobile in 1886, people were scared! The horses were scared! There are stories that people required a man to walk in front of the earliest cars carrying a red flag as a warning for fear of something happening. . Nowadays, when it comes to new technology, there are more people that will jump in head first. They gotta have the latest, coolest gadget before anyone else. I have a friend like that and he is constantly on the search for cutting-edge emerging technologies. But for many of us, there’s a comfort level that we need to reach before we can take that step, or in this case, that drive. If that comfort level is broken before a solid foundation of trust has been established, it can shatter an image. If there is an autonomous vehicle accident, the consumer will have no problem pointing fingers. Moreover, that fear and lack of trust that consumers hold onto will be difficult to restore. Brand image is fragile.
Regarding sensationalism, it is evident that our media has power to twist and skew pretty much anything. This power can be irrevocable. - Blame the Lawyers!!
- Liability - Government and industry cannot decide who is responsible for the insurance risk. Car makers don’t want the insurance risk. Insurance companies don’t reduce rates for driverless technology.
- Blame the Government(s)!
- Regulations - government (both state and federal) can’t organize quickly around the technology. States pass conflicting laws regulating the technology differently. Carmakers throw their hands up in the air because they can make cars that are “legal” in all states.
Two words: Red tape. The interstate bureaucratic agreements and changes that need to be approved are nothing short of colossal, enormous, immense and monumental (I’ll put away the thesaurus now). E-ZPass comes to mind when thinking about different DOT’s working together. But autonomous connected vehicles and a passive transponder are like apples to oranges. It does provide a glimpse at how our state and federal levels can work together to create something positive. We shall see.
- Money, Money, Money (the downside)
- Economics - Car companies & government don’t want to risk negative impacts of transformation such as job loss
- Some other worldwide economic or political event focuses attention and resources away from Driverless Technology
- Driverless Technology cost curves don’t come down as fast as predicted
- “I fear the Geeks, even when they bring gifts”(1)
- Public fear of government control and loss of privacy
- Public fear of technologies they don’t understand
Let’s look at the facts. If a human isn’t driving the vehicle, can they be held responsible? An autonomous vehicle should reduce the liability for the driver, after all, the driver is now out of the picture. But the risk has to fall somewhere, and the next responsible party would seem to be the vehicle. But does that mean it’s the auto manufacturer or the manufacturer of the technology or the owner of the vehicle? And if it is the technology, will we know if it was within the vehicle or an external cause? To what degree will we be able to differentiate the actual cause of the accident? And what if there’s a power outage and there are no traffic signals? Whose fault is that? The DOT for not having a back up system? You get the picture.
Money shows up on both sides of this coin. After all, that’s what makes the world go round. The impact that the shift to driverless transportation will have on our entire economy and reversely the impact our economy can have on driverless transportation is an important issue to think about.
The onset of smartphones turned our world upside down, and perhaps inside out. We can find and transfer information at dizzying speeds. With that instant accessibility we have lost our privacy. What can we hold sacred? There is always the notion that Big Brother is behind and within everything. Now with vehicles communicating with each other there won’t be an original thought left in the universe! We might as well be living in A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick) or Knight Rider (Glen Larson). That should be enough to send you packing for a cabin in the woods, off the grid of course.
Will we have Driverless Transportation within the next 10 years? How would you feel if you heard of an autonomous automobile accident? Would it sway you one way or another to get into a driverless vehicle? Who do you think should be responsible for the insurance risk? Let us know what you think about these topics in the comments below.
If you want to receive automatic notices on new blog entries, Click this button up above on the right:
Follow Driverless Transport
____________________________________________________________________________
(1) Virgil - Ancient Roman poet. (Well sort of)
