That they&#x27;re testing a place designed for human interaction and living without people is retarded. They should instead consider allowing people to live there that would cause minimal disruption and accept tradeoffs. Whole area doesn&#x27;t need to have people but activity going on would be good for research. Might even pay for some of it in form of taxes or bills for infrastructure. Later they can test the stuff in areas with more diverse crowds.<p>Seems having people there would be minimally disruptive while giving more real-world information about the stuff. I&#x27;ll also throw in that they might have those people there in one spot and people in other spots picked for controlled studies. You can do both.