the near-term future (1 decade) for autonomous cars is not that great. What’s been accomplished, legally speaking, is great but more limited than most people appreciate.
How do you get from the second sentence to the first sentence?
Isn’t it premature to make predictions about car use? Shouldn’t you start with predictions about further legal change? (of course there is positive feedback, so they aren’t completely independent)
Or maybe the legal barrier isn’t the first one to look at. When you predict that even niches that can ignore public road law will not be dominated by autonomous cars a decade from now, you seem to be making a prediction that does not depend on the law. But the relationship between your various claims is not clear to me.
How do you get from the second sentence to the first sentence?
I thought it was fairly clear: major legal obstacles remain, and essentially nothing has been done. Hence, application will be limited.
Shouldn’t you start with predictions about further legal change?
Maybe, if I had any idea how to phrase it. I would’ve hoped the excerpts conveyed a sense of how complex and legalistic things are. Do I phrase it as ‘passed legislation’? But what about states where what matters is how courts interpret some phrasing in existing law relating to horses? Or what about ones where what matters is whether the insurance giants will sue the begeezus out of any autonomous car? If it’s legislation, what exactly should it say? Does a prediction about legalization count if the legislation forces all liability onto the car manufacturer and so no one will sell an autonomous car into that state and you can’t actually buy one there?
When you predict that even niches that can ignore public road law will not be dominated by autonomous cars a decade from now, you seem to be making a prediction that does not depend on the law.
This is just an observation that some niches are being taken over right now: I understand some warehouses are being automated as we speak, in particular, Amazon’s. But these things take time. Everything physical moves slower than software.
How do you get from the second sentence to the first sentence?
Isn’t it premature to make predictions about car use? Shouldn’t you start with predictions about further legal change? (of course there is positive feedback, so they aren’t completely independent)
Or maybe the legal barrier isn’t the first one to look at. When you predict that even niches that can ignore public road law will not be dominated by autonomous cars a decade from now, you seem to be making a prediction that does not depend on the law. But the relationship between your various claims is not clear to me.
I thought it was fairly clear: major legal obstacles remain, and essentially nothing has been done. Hence, application will be limited.
Maybe, if I had any idea how to phrase it. I would’ve hoped the excerpts conveyed a sense of how complex and legalistic things are. Do I phrase it as ‘passed legislation’? But what about states where what matters is how courts interpret some phrasing in existing law relating to horses? Or what about ones where what matters is whether the insurance giants will sue the begeezus out of any autonomous car? If it’s legislation, what exactly should it say? Does a prediction about legalization count if the legislation forces all liability onto the car manufacturer and so no one will sell an autonomous car into that state and you can’t actually buy one there?
This is just an observation that some niches are being taken over right now: I understand some warehouses are being automated as we speak, in particular, Amazon’s. But these things take time. Everything physical moves slower than software.