[TalonDJ]

“If driverless cars killed 20,000 people per year, it would still be a big improvement over the 50,000 or so killed by drivers. Wehave to keep in mind that the current technology kills too.”

If the 20,000 die but there is no one who is liable? Then no. It is not ‘better’. Current auto deaths have established legal tools for establishing liability. The current technology does very little of the killing. It is rare that a vehicular death is ruled as being the fault of the vehicle itself.

[Reno89519]

Ookay, we have 37461 deaths last here for over 263 million cars on the road. For a few hundred driverless cars, we have a death. There are only 53 cities with driverless cars, and only a few actually on the road. If we say for dicussion that there are 263 driverless cars, that is three deaths per thousand driverless cars. Ramp up to half of cars on the road being driverless, you are talking about a MILLION deaths by driverless cars instead of the 37 thousand by human drivers.

I'll take the human driven cars with about one death per 10,000 cars instead of three for each thousand driverless cars.

[Vince Ferrer]

Tesla strikes another deal that shows it's about to turn the car insurance world upside down

The insurance market is already adjusting.

[miniTAX]

“If the 20,000 die but there is no one who is liable?”

---

That’s goofy! With absurd assumptions, any conclusion would be possible.
Any insurance company would be happy to take the liability if told it has half the number of cases to deal with.