Some of these discussions seem to severely underestimate human intelligence and the ability to reason and take decisions rapidly.<p>There are hundreds of millions of cars operating in all sorts of conditions with little incident. There are literally hundreds of thousands of preemptive actions, foresight, experience and instinctive actions at play for every possibility on roads that millions of people adopt easily.<p>To say that&#x27;s not good enough one must articulate a system that is clearly better or has the potential while avoiding a broad brush with 0.1% incidents or diminishing human drivers. That&#x27;s an argument of convenience and could reflect a lack of understanding of the scope and scale of the problem. This is just sandbags, there are literally millions of obstacles and scenarios negotiated without incident everyday.<p>Crashes in snow is not always about bad decisions. It could also be extremely poor conditions that cars should not be in, inadequate vehicle or tyres and computing will not help if hardware is deficient. Presuming the worst of others or jumping to conclusions about their intelligence levels is unsavory and dangerous if used to push something.<p>An AI vehicle in any crowded Asian city is going to be literally stranded by indecision. On relatively empty and organized roads the computing power needed will barely scratch the surface of what a proper self driving AI system needs to be unless you redesign the roads and place constraints, which then becomes a different discussion to approach carefully.