The present AV firm messaging technique is a traditional case of a false dilemma fallacy. They body the scenario as a alternative between continued human drivers killing individuals (with out statistical context) vs. immature robotaxis who do not drink and drive (however make different errors). (Wikipedia: False dilemma)
The current Cruise advert specifically is a plainly ridiculous doubling-down on the business’s lengthy discredited propaganda playbook.
Cruise NY Instances advert: https://twitter.com/kvogt/standing/1679517290847694848
Evaluation of AV business playbook: https://www.eetimes.com/autonomous-vehicle-myths-the-dirty-dozen/
A extra affordable message could be cities want robotaxis for <causes> and robotaxi corporations will use <outlined, balanced metrics, acknowledged prematurely quite than cherry picked later> to indicate they’re no worse than human drivers throughout improvement, with month-to-month report card disclosures. Improved security comes later — all of us hope.
Right here is the place issues actually stand:
- It’s too early to know whether or not present robotaxi know-how is safer than human drivers for fatalities. The business is stringing us alongside hoping they’ll present they’re secure over time (beginning now, however not likely there but).
- Non-autonomous know-how (AEB) is making much more of a contribution proper now — however is lacking from the false dilemma.
- Public transit (a lot safer) additionally not within the dialogue.
- Enhancing street security (pace limits, site visitors calming, and many others.) additionally not within the dialogue. Additionally lacking are particular pedestrian and bike owner security enhancements. Whereas we’re at it, seat belts, drunk driving, and motorbike security measures.
- The messaging from either side (elements of the SF govt and particularly Cruise) on crashes doesn’t deal with elements required for an affordable comparability. (ODD, baseline driver inhabitants, and many others.)
- It’s clear that automobiles from each Waymo and Cruise are creating public street disruption. There isn’t any excuse for impeding emergency responders simply to get “Look Ma, No Driver!!” optics.
- The know-how may be superior by persevering with to check whereas having human drivers or in-car valets (worker within the entrance passenger seat) to mitigate issues. Their Security Administration System ought to embrace a step of including/eradicating in-car automobile supervisors till points that trigger public disruption are proven to be resolved in deployment.
- Cruise specifically must get extra diligent about pre-deployment testing. There’s merely no excuse for rear-ending a Muni bus attributable to a software program defect in an uncrewed automobile that occurred in a fairly regular scenario. Waymo is not excellent, however their failures are extra on the edge.
- The general public outrage is completely self-inflicted by corporations attributable to their exploitation of the municipal preemption clause in state-level laws quite than being accountable street customers. Enjoying the “we must always forgive their drivers who’re nonetheless studying” card has worn out its welcome.
Some would possibly need to level out that some corporations are worse actors than others, however all the businesses have their points. (For instance, good work by the Waymo security group is damage by their authorities relations breathless security hype messaging.)
And the truth is {that a} crash or opposed information for one firm hurts all of them.
