|
They might be highly trained and on top of their game, but that game is orders of magnitude more complex than driving a car. So they need aids to take care of the more routine tasks, and to watch out for potentially dangerous situations. Similary with driving a car. It's all a matter of degree.Good stuff, but not borne out by the evidence.
I can't see why you think that technology will exacerbate the effects of driver error. On the contrary, it mitigates them. Drivers are not making more errors because they have ACC; but what errors they do make are less likely to lead to accidents.
Why do you think that Volvo is confident that they can make their cars death-proof? Not because they are developing infinitely safe driving courses. It's because they know that they can develop suitable technology. Even without that claim, they are still very safe (if boring).
Roads are getting safer: what does it matter if that extra safety is technology-led? Yes, there will always be examples where it could be claimed that the technology got in the way. "I don't wear a seat belt because it's better to be thrown clear in an accident". There have been accidents where that could be said to have worked. But there are far more occasions where it has saved lives.
Anyway, where would you draw the line? Is current technology just about right? Or would you ban seat belts, windscreen wipers, heated rear screens, radial ply tyres, ABS, disc brakes, ....?
|
|