What a driverless world could look like | Wanis Kabbaj 

Complex solutions that require a lot of money or healthy vibrant cities that are economically siund

underground passage and a bridge across the street could fix that

@@tukangpempek5390 That's fine for able bodied people, that don't sweat in hotter and longer summers. But what about elderly or people in wheelchairs? Do people on bikes have to carry them up and down stairs for every intersection? That intersection he showed should only happen in very limited situations.

@@tukangpempek5390 Would you want to live in a city where you had to climb up stairs every time you wanted to cross the street? Is that a pleasant walking experience? Would you want to go on long walks? Would old people and the disabled be able to go anywhere? How would bikes cross the street? It's been tried and it's a failed solution. It's a band-aid solution to "fix" the problem of cars killing people. Don't treat the symptom, and instead get rid of the root cause, the car. They don't belong in cities because they can kill you.

@@tukangpempek5390 just look at what underground and bridge crossing done to your country. Nothing gets done.

Well there goes my screen and my coffee. Thanks green silver

And something to clean the blood of the pedestrians and bikers

It wont matter in a very short time Sure, we have to get use to it; but if this was installed tomorrow. the young generations would never know anything different.

You could just ditch the windows or close your eyes and have Morning Mood by Edvard Grieg playing on the speakers. :D

I bet the people from 100 years ago would say the same thing about airplanes.

Or cyclists.

Yeah, ridiculous. Though one solution would be that the autonomous cars could sometimes be more efficient by driving slow enough to never have to stop at intersections. Probably better than the "hurry and wait" situation we're always in.

they never take people into consideration

I mean when they talk about taking advantage of the vertical dimension, it includes pedestrian tunnels as well, so I guess it would be more efficient to put all pedestrian crossings underground.

@@breadw7490 But woulnd't it be better doing it the other way around then. Pedestrian above ground, vehicular transportation below ground. That way, when you walk you actually get to enjoy the walk.

Americans desire comfort. We don't want to bike to work in the heat, cold, rain, and blizzards. We don't grind 40 hours a week only to bike to work. Europeans don't desire comfort as much as Americans that's why they smell much worse. Also you still need roads for logistics so might as well optimize them as much as possible. The Netherlands GDP per capita is much lower than the US for a reason The US is a nation centered around individuals. Most of us don't desire to bike alongside strangers or sit next to them on trains and there's nothing wrong with that. Europeans desire collectivism which isn't wrong but it's good to have both ideologies.

Good point

One we have autonomous vehicles, people will stop buying cars. For a monthly subscription, an autonomous vehicle will show up to your destination through an app. Once you’ve been dropped off, it will pick up someone else who has summoned it. There are, of course, other problems which we will face, but the car will not just sit there in a parking lot, as it does now.

that's what he said.. that blood cells are shared between organs. If they were restricted to specific organs, there would probably be traffic jams. that's why he moved into talking about modular buses and traffic flow.

Thats the idea behind public transport, there is no specific destination but a series of stops along a path

Thank you! I was like why is he even saying that. My thought : driverless cars will bring the downfall of human transportation; from destroying our social cultures to destroying our lives. We should understand the limits of technology as we take the right steps in its growth. The transport module of using mass transit or private vehicles will always be unpredictable. 1. There are people with many cars but will wake up one day and choose to take the bus. 2. There are others who have lots of money but don't see the point of buying a car when they can just lease at way cheaper costs giving them a chance to explore all brands without large costs. 3. There are others who use transit on weekdays because they don't have enough money for maintainance and decide to use their cars only on weekends. ...And the diversity of human kind keeps widening As a society we should seek a world with diverse options that harmoniously synchronizes together. Not a bias world that looks to widen profits of a few big companies. I personally don't trust coded programs to drive me from one place to another. They are CODES. Main disadvantage of driver cars -Prone to accidents due to unfocused driving . Solution - use codes to stop accidents by altering speeds or directions of the car where necessary Main disadvantage of driver less cars - they can be hacked at any time to cause accidents. Solution - none since there is no driver nor driver mechanism Please people support right choices for our planet. We only have one.

@jan simonides Do you really or do you just think that you do? You're constantly staring at asphalt, lights, and metal boxes, and when you get going, you're going too fast to enjoy the architecture. And you won't smell the smells, hear the sounds, or meet the people of each neighborhood. It's just you in your metal cocoon.

In the future there will be no such things, that's why.

But I like cycling and walking. I don't want to get in a vehicle when I can walk a few minutes.

@Derpster Are you kidding? Of course, there will be pedestrians & bicyclists. In some highly built-up areas, bicyclists may be harder to accommodate.

But you wouldn't use the same roads - sort of like the lymbic system. Also, have you ever seen a traffic jam with humans? Even in places with the most pedestrians on earth like the Times Square in NY or the Shibuya Crossing in Tokyo the flow almost stays at maximum velocity. Humans on foot are much more nimble and have a much better feeling of their surroundings (except when occupied whith their smartphone) so they aren't nearly as big of a traffic problem.

MrBaronmoll : I think you meant "lymphatic". They're very different things...

Steven Arvizu *rolls eyes*

Steven Arvizu so shiny ~~~+

CD's NUTS XD

Steven Arvizu hahaha that's what I thought he said at first. I was confused

Steven Arvizu You should drop to your knees and thank God that English is the current Lingua Franca for our planet. Just think if you had to learn to speak Mandarin. I wonder how your pronunciation would be.

Just one bug in the daily software would do it as well. Or one mechanical problem.

Absolutely texas. However, there are less bugs and mechanical failures then stupid people. There tech has been taking over out jobs since the creation of the plow. We suck. At literally everything. So as we learn how to break down the stuff we do into the smallest steps, more accurate and less mistake making machines are made to take over.

@@wylie2835 True. I find the best arguments for automated cars is that it may have technical problems.. The worst being that they simply don't trust them. "The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates 103 people are killed in the US in motor-vehicle accidents every day, and more than 94% of crashes are due to driver error. Autonomous vehicles could virtually eliminate an entire category of lethal accidents." - Quartz News Driverless cars are going to evolve while human drivers are still on the road; they'll be forced to deal with human error before the roads even get to being fully autonomous. I trust a computer to do my job more efficiently and safely than myself. It's not self-interested, it doesn't get distracted, and it doesn't make decisions based on any amount of unstable emotion. I heard someone actually complaining, when she was 80 and had problems seeing clearly... Amongst other health problems, that her license was taken from her. Old people on the road is another huge contributor to wanting autonomous vehicles... Nothing against them personally, but I don't think they have any business driving if they can't pass a driver's test made for 15 y/o's.

The actual solution: design easy to walk cities. A place where you go to the groceries by foot, your kids walk to school, your job is a bicycle ride away and entertainment is a few short blocks from your home. Cars would be deincentivated. Instead of being practical, they'd be inconvenient, an unnecessary luxury to go through narrow streets full of pedestrians. This ALONE is a game changer.

A grid this automated will have no signs or lights, making it impossible to navigate without a self driving car.

deep.

joeycommet45 or any city ~120yrs ago

***** Just imagine a railroad, with no trains

joeycommet45 How about a runway?

Analytic31 So imagine a runway, with no planes

I suspect that will be done, cross walks will go away, and jaywalking will come off the books so you can cross any where. You almost won't even have to look both ways. I mean really, that is huge chunk of steel moving pretty quick, try not to put it to the test.

IsYitzach Yeah, that is what concerns me. Inertia is still a thing. lol

I would imagine they would build crosswalks and sidewalks above the road to accommodate pedestrians. That way there would be no chance of anyone getting hurt even accidentally.

Shelby M. That sounds difficult for people in wheelchairs unless it's a little elevator of some kind.

Then why don't they do that more often now? They do it some now, but not very often at all.

Don't worry, in this dystopian future, we'll be under constant video surveillance and every single mile you and that creep travel will be logged. :P

I love being in control of a vehicle going 10 mph in highway traffic

Dipsy Teletubbie internet bless you

Dipsy Teletubbie already looks like this in asia lol

Well, if that is the case, India is way ahead of everyone ;) They have been driving like this forever!

Yea, but, not as fast though.

no thats just what it looks like without women driving

you wont need parking spaces in the future if a fleet of cars is fully autonomous theyll drop you off at your dfestinantion and move onto the next customer like Uber. When you're ready to leave you hail a ride and the next available autonomous vehicle is notified and leaves the stream of driverless cars. It then picks you up and merges back into the stream of driverless cars on its way to your destination, completely friction less transport.

WHY human blood circulatory system is so effcient? Because everything flow...and cells are semi-solid.

krux02 why is that?

Because when Germany was split, almost nobody was allowed to move to the other side of Germany. While West Germans were allowed in East Germany the other way around was not. Therefore trading or even sharing technology was not possible. East and West Berlin therefore used a slightly different technology for street lights. And that's still visible today.

Ben Israel second world war

East has sodium vapor lamps, west has fluorescent lamps. Interesting. Apparently this was brought to people's attention by Chris Hadfield who took a photo of Berlin from the ISS.

krux02 ii

atomicmrpelly If you view it from the side, it looks like a sliver :D

You’re not a commuter, you’re a nuisance. Don’t get in the way of technology and progress because you like the way primitive tech “feels”. That has never worked.

Zach Hipsley The closer we get to technology the further we get from humanity

Zach Hipsley I really hate people like you, you can't fathom a world where people choose not to bow down to the stupid tech companies that you fanboy over. If anything, it's people like YOU who are holding the world back

it worked for the amish

@@streamtrollmike5348 strong language from both of you, but yes compromises need to be made, but especially on highways and larger cities autonomous vehicles need to be put in sooner than later, it's such a an easy way to save 100s of lives daily and save days of people's lives yearly

Eric Beach Maybe small Bridges or Tunnles

I love that he asks as "if walking in a city with [early parts of talk] was not exotic enough? [you also get the frogger death level]"

Have you seen the experiments with dutch intersections where there are no traffic lights or anything else? The rule is pretty simple. Cars HAVE to give way to pedestrians. Contrary to what you might expect, that's both safer and more efficient it turns out.

You can't make a bridge every 20 meter or so. Now in the city it's nice to cross the street wherever you want. I don't think people will like it when they can only cross the street via bridges and tunnels every 500 meters... "Hey, let's go to that shop across the street" "Ok, let's walk another 500 meters, i think there is a bridge and then walk 500 meters back." ... No, people just want to keep on crossing streets wherever they want.

Look at the Las Vegas strip. That system already exists.

On elevated sidewalks above the road.

VoxelDraqon That's idiotic.

Rebasepoiss But... Mah FUTURRRE

Rebasepoiss How?

VoxelDraqon Raising up all the sidewalks would be impossible. The alternative would be to build over- or underpasses for pedetrians at every crossing. That would be extremely inconvenient for pedestrians, very expensive and would destroy a lot of inner-cities.

Damn physics spoiling a good time!

Not for space communists!

But they won't have to break, they'll gas just enough for maximum fuel efficiency

We need a city that only has one road! Now thats pretty efficient, lol

Vehicles slow down also when driver gets old :)

It's actually red blood cells shaped like cars.

Bruh u dumb but ill answer anyways. Its a top view of what a world with self driving cars would look like.

no its a bunch of asians

xD so true

david kwon dude its a joke chill

No such thing as a utopia. Just like there's no best laptop that we come up with and stop evolving. Next year it'll be thinner, faster, more powerful. Cameras used to use film, now they're digital. There are no fixed notions. Everything changes and evolves. A utopia is impossible. What is possible is doing what we know and have been exposed to.

"A utopia is impossible" - Thats my point.

Yeah I'm agreeing with you. And I don't think that saying it's utopian means it's not possible. (By my definition of utopia it is) 1. We both agree that a utopia is impossible (And btw I meant to say I can't accept the notion of utopia) 2. We both don't agree that what he's saying is not possible. 3. The technology he presents has been around for a while, and is easily achievable. I don't think it's utopian at all. In comparison to something like The Venus Project (which gets that comment more often), The Venus Project is on a way higher level than the stuff he's talking about here. Honestly the tech he's talking about is so simple. As long as we're aware of the idea we can create it. If we don't know about it, we won't be able to create it. In other words, the ideas he presents are very achievable with current technology.

Imagination is the essence of discovery.

Youssef Good one, but I was replying to the OP. My point was that there's no way we can develop our infrastructure without having grand thoughts.

Sirapob Klarod Exactly!

" accident rate would be very close to zero" $50 says they'll still make you buy insurance for it.

Grumblebuggy Spergamatron You'd still want insurance, incase of a storm etc or if someone broke into your car.

Frank'sConception They don't make you buy insurance for either of those instances. Not in my state, anyway, and I can't remember ever hearing about someone needing anything more than liability insurance to drive legally.

That's not to mention all the extra work you could get done in the car.

el Patron

I thought Pablo escobar is from colombia O.o !!

bruh ich heiße Pablo und komme auch aus Düsseldorf ... dann scheint mein Penis wohl doch kleiner zu sein als die Welt :c

PicklesRTasty the honest truth is that rural areas dont have the population density or traffic issues as cities. When driverless cars are used everywhere, id expect the only benefit rural areas would experience would be the lack of speed limits, driving at 150, maybe 200 mph.

It's probably because the number of people not living in cities is quickly decreasing. Though i doubt the difference would be too much.

Non-automated or manually operated bicycles would be too dangerous and unpredictable to allow onto automated roads. There'd likely be either separate bicycle paths (e.g. parks), or under/overground pathways that would be exclusive to bicycles and/or pedestrians. That's a good thing though - assuming your experiences are like mine and you've nearly been sideswiped by far too many jeeps, taking them away from behind the wheel would be a wonderful, incredible thing. I'm sure the most genius minds in urban design intentionally left out bicycles.

Benjamin Baril Should be the opposite though autonomous cars should be driving underground and bikers, motorcyclist, and regular cars should be above.

More obesity!

Bicycles can always have separate bicycle paths, or if the government insists that can go on sidewalks. Remember that bicycles have to have a driver, so they would never be allowed on a driverless road.

Because they actually suck as transportation. Sure, works on Amsterdam to get to work, amazing. Now about all the other needs...

Underrated comment :D

Jared Hall good idea… will take a lot of work to get there.

Only said that to say it will probably be a while before we get them if we do. Driverless cars are happening right now though… I feel like thats pretty much the same thing

One word: Bridge.

go into a car, drive one the other side

Bridges every where isn't feasible but you could have the zebra crossing/cross walk buttons linked to the network of cars letting them know they need to stop.

You're stuck in today's mindset. When the transportation system is optimized you won't need to cross the street because streets as we know it won't exist.

In the future the shops will come to you, man.

And if it's like a larger RV type mode with a bed and bath you could continue on with your life in general, how cool is that?

Don thats would also be cool. would be fun for road trips with friends and family. however the car version in my mind would probably be like a international first class seat. an individual pod with tv and bed.

I agree, it's all you need for those short commutes. This is exciting but at the same time, I can't help but be concerned over potential hacking or AI malfunctions. It's likely manual driving options will be eliminated for optimum "safety" but that puts you at risk of getting your vehicle essentially hijacked and driven off a cliff while the hijacker is sitting miles away, hands on keyboard. Then there's potential for totalitarian government abuse by restricting movement within and outside of the city.

Please don't drive. save a life now...

You know you could just take the train/plane/bus for that. ;)

Google has this exact concept. They're envisioning a world where people don't own vehicles, but rather they can contact some kind of vehicle service to pick them up and drop them off. Basically like if every vehicle on the street was a self-diving taxi that can be called at any time.

isn't that an uber?

Kratax that called Minority Report

Then you get a ghetto taxi.

surely theyd become filthy with people dropping crap in them since the vehicle doesn't belong to them.

dan connor lol, privacy.

Matthey Raz oh damn!

Sweeeeet, move the camera to the right a little please

In Toronto, they're having meetings about this. They've been having these meetings for the past couple decades and have barely done anything. But they're certainly having a lot of meetings!

Get another job.

That part at the end does *not* sound cool at all. How is any cyclist or pedestrian supposed to safely cross that mess?

Matthew Tolentino VR

Yeah, it would be wildly immoral to insist on driving if driverless cars are so much saver.

Matthew Tolentino Hey we revoked people's freedom to drive! What should we do? I know, develop something to make them even lazier while bitching about how lazy they are! Flawless logic! You really are a moron!

Analytic31 Taking away the right to drive and making people sit in some automatic driving car is what will make people more lazy.

To clarify, self driving cars do not make people lazy. Rather, it saves time we spend on the road on doing other stuff. It is also safer, especially if every car is self-driving.

Bill Kong Put a sensor on your bike, and the cars will move around you.

In practice that might be what has to be done. The problem is that the optimized traffic flow described in this video can only be achieved when all the parameters of this flow are well known. As soon as you start trying to account for the unpredictable movements of pedestrians and cyclists, you compromise a lot of efficiency.

We could build a lane specifically for cyclists and prohibit the cars from being able to access these lanes maybe

Or just potentially put the entire self-driving system underground? Above ground even.

yes. the self driving system could work very well underground. I think kind of like the had in I-robot

That's what I've been saying. Make the traffic three dimensional and build millions of kilometers of tunnels for cars.

You know that it would be super expensive, right? It is easier to build transit infrastructure

StrykerTen is your life more important than every single life form on Earth? Better to just remove every non ecofriendly vehicles.

***** Yes, it would be UNBELIEVABLY expensive, I think looking at the invention of the modern sewer is a good example. Unbelievably expensive, but not impossible. I think if we considered the health benefits of more people walking and biking locally reducing the rates of obesity and such which costs us countless billions annually, I feel it could reasonably be looked at as a long term investment in preventative medicine. People are also a LOT happier when surrounded by a bit of nature, replacing city roads with footpaths with gardens along them would see a considerable drop in rates of depression and suicide Also I dont necessarily agree that simply building more regular infrastructure is necessarily easier or cheaper. For lower density areas you can scale up a bit no problem, but for places that are already pushed to their limits (think new york, beijing, tokyo) where roads are pushed up against buildings as close as they can get you cant just expand the roads, theres no room to expand into. At that point, you either expand up and build a second set of roads above the first, or you go down (or do nothing and have weeks long traffic jams I suppose, but that doesnt really seem like a valid choice lol)

Jessica I dont think thats as big of an issue as it might seem. We have massive city spanning sewer systems built over a hundred years ago that have done incredibly well despite the tech used to build it being so old. We also have major subway systems in pretty much every major city in the world and subway tunnels collapsing in isnt a particularly big concern, we built em well and they last. I dont see any reason we couldnt do the same for a car network

We (humans) are so stupid that we'll build roads above and walkways below the surface. Power structures win over logic and quality of life.

It's not just in Russia. I'm from Poland and subways are common in every major city with huge traffic. And these subways are full of shops, bars, restaurants and banks, so the space is also used for many things. And I wouldn't call it stupid, Shoulders of Giants. It's easier to make a subway for pedestrians, than to literally build entire new underground road system for cars. It can be done only in really small and new cities, where there are still only couple of streets and no major traffic going on. Take Masdar as an example of such city.

They don't care that's true, but it's vital that they get to a specific place at a specific time

I hope you realize that it was just a metaphor. Symbolism.

if the system were to work, there will be a specific amount of time it takes to get wherever you are going. Instead of an estimate time there will be an exact time. Therefore, a person is capable of timing it exactly right, because there are no external factors that may effect timing, i.e. no traffic or stop lights.

***** Although that would be if you exclude the fact that the cars are built by humans, they can break at random times. So can the software, also written by humans. and also other kinds of unpredictable natural events. edit: Though still ofc driverless is the future.

The blood caries: - OXYGEN; - NUTRIENTS; - WASTE etc. To desired parts of the body...so in contrary, the contents within the blood (which is what he was talking about - not limited to red blood cells) move with an intent to arrive at a destination.

Uegene Dyalnburke lkoo

Uegene Dyalnburke LMAO

Uegene Dyalnburke in my city taxi drivers are here to attrmpt to run over people getting off of streetcars and buses

Or people that actually like driving?

George Subie there will still be some opportunities for people to drive - maybe in the countryside, in rural areas, and in tracks. And while it would be best to force people to use automatic cars, dense cities are the best place to start

This is uncanny

Xoreign I would hack my ex's car and crash it into the tallest building on her route lmao........there may be people who intend to do such things and it can be harmful. unless it's a closed network

Ole Tim Herr Right. But I doubt it would kill the amount that are currently killed every year due to human error

Xoreign well, drinking and driving will not be a problem then

Muhkuh Muh Sorry. But i prefer the saving of lives over fun.

Xoreign, Have you ever read The Giver? If you follow that line of reasoning, then that's the reality that you want to implement. If everyone was safe from every known danger, then we'd be restricted from many activities that make living....well, living. Can't drive. Can't backpack, or ski, or play any sports whatsoever.

the same system could be used for this, just call one of the pods from your phone and it will take you across the street, within a minute or two. i've imagined a system like this while siting in traffic several times

You don't have too, just call the shop you want to go to and it will arrive, moving buildings is our future! No longer shall we need to walk to the store, it will come to us!

Guys, if you think about it, it would be much easier to just cross the street without the need of making an arrangement for it. Just start walking and you're there. :)

I presume it could work much the same as a we have now with crossing signals. Whenever someone wants to cross the street, just press the button, and it will adjust traffic accordingly so you can cross the street. It would definitely cure J-walkers haha. The only problem I foresee now is if traffic moves non-stop, and one person wants to cross the street, then traffic adjusts for that one person, what will the rest of non stop traffic do. It could create a HUGE traffic jam. Not sure if that makes sense. Another thing I thought of might be building of short under lying (underground?) walkways where crosswalks are currently. Then you wouldn't have to worry about traffic at all. Just walk underneath.

Oh there it is, you said it, just walk underneath. :) And that already exists so I guess my question wasn't necessary in the first place lol.

That would certainly turn out better for the Anti-Trump protesters

Cheecks Jamz good point. It would be easy for people to completely block off roads without fear. Then the roads would get smaller and smaller as people setup little shops and crap on the road.

Stephen WTF? lol. I think you have a point, though.

The cars wouldn't need to go any faster than already allowed to be more efficient and the autonomous vehicles being developed have the ability to avoid collisions with pedestrians and other objects already.

But say you have to drop your kids to school, forth you're not alone but back you are. That already makes 50%. I think the problem is that cars are personal.

It would work like a valve system

Also you would probably try and limit the bulk of high speed traffic to specific roads (veins) and have the cars travel slower once they're in the side roads (arteries).

The Mad Hattress I caught that as well.

The Mad Hattress the past is what holds us back.

no

MarkHinds If we don't learn from the past we are doomed to repeat it, but I digress. Some people, like myself, enjoy studying and learning about antiquity, no matter how "irrelevant" it might be.

The Mad Hattress Paris destroying there own historical buildings is basically like them taking there own flag, taking out a match, and lighting it on fire

that's the only part of the video that matches the title, but it is still very very poor on the subject.

thanks

Thanks. Not all heroes wear capes!

Aleksandar Panov they're also squishy and can run into the walls of the vessel.

Maybe cars can bump into each other in the future if they are made with a even lighter material & have a new construction. Who knows?

+Jessica Ramps.

there can be stop lights for pedestrians, where pushing a button will automatically stop driverless cars to allow you to cross, but there will be no need for traffic lights is what he's saying, because all of that can be automated with computers, your car doesn't really need to SEE the traffic light, just wirelessly transmit the command that it needs to stop.

If you stand at the edge of the sidewalk the cars can interpret that as intent to cross and signal the following cars to stop for you anywhere. Also the only people that will be walking will be those that choose too. The era of having to walk out of necessity would be over.

The disabled will be calling a car to take them places; they won't be walking anyway. The price of transportation will be so low that it would be free for disabled people and the poor.

Jessica Technology gets cheaper and faster at an exponential rate. Moore's law.

agree

That is a hackers wet dream

Flawless. Just like our election system. And corporations.

You shouldn't be. He wants you to sit in a metal box and gain weight. We should walk and bike more and combine these modes with trains.

Poor Man Mods Hahahaha I saw that...AWESOME. Now that was worth watching lol

100 times better than any self driving car could ever be. ;)

hold on tight

you need to collect the matter that soiled the pants after crossing one or two such intersections...

inertial dampers

minimize the amount of sharp turns in a route and possibly a slight tilt to turn the sideways G forces into downward G forces, which people are used to as it's called gravity.

If the seats inside rotated so that your back always faced the direction of the G-forces you could turn as fast as the grip of your tires will allow with very little discomfort.

And don't forget that they're also still cars. Cars that mechanically break down for any huge host of reasons. And these will have even more complex systems!

Everything will kill you in the future. You don't need gun to assassinate people. All you need is knowledge and internet connection. From car accident to poisoning body through automatic insulin injection.

@Sticky6ft No, we should be asking ourselves "Am I willing to trust my life or my family's to this thing?" My answer is no. And I hope it is for others, too, because I don't want to run into these things out there. I'd rather deal with imperfect humans. At least our imperfections are slightly more predictable. And if I screw up and drive off a cliff driving, at least it's MY fault, and not a random fluke of the universe laughing at me. To me, this question boils to another very simple question: Should life be driven by fate or free will? I ALWAYS will choose free will, no matter how much "safer" fate might theoretically be.

I've been looking through the comments, am I the only one thinking what happens if the cars are driven by drunk person, or driver gets distracted by his cellphone and it ends up causing a crash?

FYI cars can already get hacked. For the past 10-15 years or so cars have implemented more and more technology to make the car more efficient. Besides, any hacker can break into your computer or phone right now and take most of your valuable information without you knowing a thing had ever changed. If hacking is such a deal breaker then you should just stop using technology.