> * move out of lane to raise it again ? (1)
> * break ? (2)
> * do nothing ? (3)
> * other ? (4)
>
> For additional fun, replace the back car with a heavy trunk, in hurry
> (so not respecting its security breaking distance with your car).

As I understand it the car would slow down at the same rate as the car 
ahead to maintain the required safety gap. What isn't clear from the 
paper is if it reacts to vehicles behind, obviously in this situation it 
would be beneficial to sacrifice some of the safety gap ahead to avoid a 
rear-end collision.

But you highlight one of the biggest issues for the car makers; if there 
is an accident involving normal cars then one or more of the drivers 
gets blamed and must pay for it, with an autonomous car the car maker 
itself could get the blame.

> I'm afraid automated driving is not for the Mediterranean.

You need to weigh up how many accidents it will avoid vs how many 
additional it will create. There's no reason why development should slow 
down on such vehicles, and surely they will get to a point where it's 
beneficial overall (I don't know if we're there yet or not).

Post a reply to this message