Deal with which part? But, in general: Limit power for high density last-mile. Use different frequency bands for different purposes. And use highly directional antennas.

I didn't say they were the same, I said functionally they were equivalent: They make the "never overdrive your ability to stop" at any reasonable speed an impossibility. In this instance "reasonable" would be balancing the need to get to your destination and not hitting kids/deer/etc on the way there. Since you can't change basic physics laws, it has to be a balance: You can either drive 5mph through the cities or understand that pedestrian accidents will happen if pedestrians don't follow the basic rules set up to keep them safer.

Not quite sure why this is the hill you're choosing to die on, but you do you, boo.

LOL! Ok. I'll play along: A couple years ago I was travelling through an intersection at the speed limit. Good visibility, clean and dry roads, no conditions that would warrant reduced speed. Someone in the opposing left-turn-lane thought he saw his light turn green so just blindly accelerated into the intersection. I had enough time to involuntarily pucker my asshole up, move my foot to the brake pedal, and steer to the left enough to hit his back wheel instead of his passenger door. T-boned him doing about 45mph.

Was I "reckless" in my actions? The officers on-scene who cited the other guy, and the insurance companies that assigned 100% blame to him, didn't seem to think so. Not sure why my scenario is any different than the one in the article.

Lol, yeah. I haven't had that one happen to me yet, but I have witnessed it happen 1st hand. Driving around deer (and children) sucks.

Functionally? Sure, close enough: Both are an unanticipated object suddenly appearing in your driving path without warning and without the requisite reaction/braking time needed to avoid hitting it. Every parked car you drive past COULD have a kid hiding behind it ready to leap out, just like every stand of trees you drive past could have a deer in it. To pulp088's point, the only reliable method to prevent accidents like this is to drive past every car at a speed that allows you to come to a complete stop in under a car-length, and a primary reason why some cities are lowering in-town limits below 25mph.

Both times I saw this it was in Bismarck, North Dakota. With the weather conditions and amount of traffic present you could have merged an aircraft carrier successfully. The only thing un-safe about the conditions for the merge in these instances was the drivers ability to execute it.

It's always the merging driver's responsibility to yield. With free-flowing freeway traffic there are fleetingly few scenarios where stopping at the end of an onramp would ever be appropriate. The lack of ability to successfully pick a spot, accelerate, and merge is a driver skill issue.

Probably. Idk. That's for the lawyers to sort out, and just like addressing any other new technology, that will take time. I suspect the answer to that will follow existing frameworks for negligence and culpability.

Bullshit. Assuming you're sober, attentive, and driving reasonably and prudently for the conditions you're not likely to be seeing the inside of a jail cell.

Especially when 93% of drivers think they possess an above-average ability to drive. That's a lot of Dunning Kreuger piloting around multi-thousand-pound blocks of steel. https://www.thewisedrive.com/t...

Depends on if the mother of that child is a luddite or not. Maybe they recognize that had their child darted out in front of a meatsack they'd probably be having an entirely different conversation.

You've been in a SIMILAR situation. Were all of the cues that you had in your situation available to the robot? How do you know it's not programmed to absorb the same data you did and take the same action?

Someone, or something. Anyone who has spent any amount of time driving in areas where forest-lined highways are common has hit a deer, or directly knows someone who has. Unless you're driving 25mph down the highway there's not a lot you can do when a deer comes bounding out of the tree line 15 feet away.

That would explain why I've witnessed, on more than one occasion, someone come to a complete stop at the "merge" portion of a freeway onramp.

I mean, it's certainly a wild concept, but it makes sense when you think about it. You have very little/no documented history of paying creditors. As a lender I really don't care if you have $100k in your bank if you have a habit of stiffing people, or at least having no proof to the contrary.

Good question, you should do some investigating.

What is your basis for that evaluation? You've already stated YOU haven't a clue what they could be doing, so how could you possibly know what number is excessive?

That's as backwards of a comment as saying a research scientist in a lab doesn't produce anything. No, they don't produce widgets to sell. Yes, their work is still valuable.

May as well throw Daylight Savings Time in there too.