Will autonomous vehicles live up to their promise?

Hi, I’m Ryan Jenkins, a philosophy professor at Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo. Think of how your world would change if you didn’t have to drive your car if your car, that is, could drive itself. So-called “autonomous vehicles” or “AVs” are one of the most hotly anticipated emerging technologies. AVs use a collection of sensors like cameras and radar to "understand" the world around them and plot a course through traffic to take occupants from A to B. Basically, they offload the task of driving from a person to a computer. And AVs offer many benefits from the mundane to the monumental. But they also provide a clear lesson in how a new technology can be a kind of mixed blessing. All technologies bring benefits at least for some otherwise, they wouldn’t be adopted. But ethicists and policymakers have raised questions about exactly <i>who</i> will benefit and who will be harmed by autonomous vehicles. Let’s start with the most important consideration given in favor of autonomous vehicles: the safety factor. Unlike human drivers, autonomous vehicles will not become tired or distracted. They won’t text or drink while driving. And they won’t get road rage. This helps explain why they will almost certainly save lives preventing at least some of the 30,000 lives lost on the roads every year in America alone. But who is most likely to see this benefit? Well,those that can afford to buy AVs first: the rich. As science fiction writer William Gibson said, the future may be here already, but it’s not evenly distributed. Beyond improvements in safety, AVs also have the potential to improve the quality of life for those of us who are vision impaired, hearing impared, or cognitively impaired for whom driving can be daunting or impossible. Cars that can drive themselves could ferry us around without the need for us to see or hear. But developing cars for the vision or hearing impaired or those who are wheelchair bound is expensive and difficult This helps explain why no major car companies produce wheelchair-accessible vehicles today. Those modifications are always added after the fact. So can we count on this benefit, if companies are just seeking to maximize their profits from AVs? On another note, if cars can drive themselves, and talk to each other, then they could follow each other much more closely. In driver’s ed, we learn to leave a few seconds of space between us and the car in front of us, but computers that can “see” and “think” faster than humans don’t need nearly as much room, maybe even just a few inches. This means fitting many more cars onto the same road, easing traffic congestion. But while vehicles that can communicate directly with each other might reduce traffic congestion on highways, these same vehicles could actually increase congestion within city limits. How could that happen? Well, much of the time cars are sitting in parking lots or driveways, and even when they’re being driven, they’re usually just carrying one or two people. That’s a lot of wasted potential If cars could drive themselves and be summoned from across town, why not use this “dead time to run errands or serve as a taxi for others who need rides? And why would I look for a parking space when I can just have my car do a few laps around the block while I run into a grocery store? Now, all of a sudden, our city streets are jammed not just with people in cars but also with empty cars driving in circles! And while cheap, on-demand mobility is great it could also reduce support for public transportation, which many rely on. What happens to people who don’t have a car and can’t afford an autonomous taxi ride everywhere they need to go? Finally, the safety benefits of autonomous vehicles might not be all they’re cracked up to be. Autonomous vehicles remove the human driver from the equation. This is what allows them to be safer in a lot of cases. But removing the human also removes a source of “common sense” decision making. How many parents would be comfortable sending their children to school in an autonomous vehicle? Or should I be worried that it might swerve out of the way to avoid a plastic bag or a candy wrapper, thus crashing and injuring my child? And what happens when some rambunctious teenagers play “chicken” with an autonomous vehicle, knowing it will always swerve to avoid a crash, as has already happened? What we see is that as technologies move through the “hype cycle”, some of the celebrations become muted, the benefits are murkier than we thought, or fewer people will benefit, or people who are already poor or disadvantaged will be left out, and new problems will be created at the same time. What technology gives with one hand, it often takes away with the other. But, maybe there are ways to enjoy the benefits of AVs fairly without taking on the burdens, or pushing these burdens onto others who are less fortunate. What do you think?