The fact you trust humans to drive more considerately and professionally than a computer designed for the purpose is amusing, especially as you won't even communicate with me on this forum yet share the open road with me and my brains.
Compare all the AI deaths to those from manual accidents, when they even remotely compare we can reassess the situation.
How do you feel when aeroplane autopilot lands the plane?
They are useless at trying to do all the calculations that our brain and eyes do automatically and almost instantly. Should be banned until they can prove the technology is safe, apart from cruise control have nothing else.
I'm really beginning to think that TTT should seek help with his obsession for autonomous vehicles. The report doesn't state that the vehicle was being driven in autonomous mode at the time of the accident. In fact, with the number of vehicles I see running red lights (I saw one today) I suspect the the driver was in control (if "Control" is the right word).
I am not sure, nay positive, that both captain and first officer both take off, at the controls of the aircraft and land it manually. In between those times the flight is on autopilot with one in the cockpit. In the case of a female flight crew they operate in the box office. :-)
//Autopilot is Tesla's semi-autonomous driver-assistance system that allows a vehicle to self-park, change lanes and navigate autonomously in certain conditions.
The company has repeatedly stated that drivers must remain alert and should not remove their hands from the steering wheel when using the feature.//
If that feature was in operation then the suspicion may be that drivers are not heeding the warnings.
aside from the technical difficulty involved is the on going false perception of those driving a car with these features, that they in fact do make the car autonomous, when it is not.
//How do you feel when aeroplane autopilot lands the plane?//
You mean "Autoland" which is a different concept to autopilot and is used mainly to enable aircraft to land in bad visibility conditions which would make a manual landing difficult or impossible.
There is one huge difference between this and autonomous road vehicles. Aircraft that use Autoland are essentially ground controlled. The airport has to be equipped with localizers and a sophisticated Instrument Landing System that sends signals to the aircraft. The aircraft's systems interpret these signals and monitors the aircraft's lateral and vertical position in relation to the runway, making corrections as required. Furthermore, only one aircraft is allowed in the airspace at any given time and a collision with another aircraft is impossible (provided Air Traffic Control has done its job properly).
There is simply no comparison between this and a car travelling on a busy road under automatic control. You might as well ask why you are not content with autonomous road vehicles but are happy to travel on an automatic "driverless" train.
autopilot can fly the plane. Autoland can land the plane. but when it all goes wrong, the system doesn't know what to do. Google Qantas 032; no computer (currently) on earth could have landed that plane at Changi as the flight crew were able to do.
TTT, you would LOVE this program on netflix. It is all about how developers shape the modern world and how accountable they are for the code they produce.
I'll link it later. It is only about 20 min but really worth the watch. It might be on youtube also.
If all cars were 'autonomous' collisions would be extremely rare because the cars would be behaving within the rules, in a predictable manner. The problem arises because all human drivers don't always behave as they should and they catch out the computer by doing the unpredictable. All experienced drivers are very good at noticing if another road user is driving just a bit erratically and allow for the unexpected - computers are just not as good at this yet and that's why drivers are advised to keep their wits about them for when the unexpected happens.