>>714785970Honestly the main issue with automated cars is insurance and accountability.
If a guy gets in a crash, it's his fault, his insurance is sued.
If a guy's automated car gets in a crash, is it his fault? Is the the car manufacturer's fault? Is it the software developer's fault?
Is it the fault of whoever it crashed into?
Who does insurance sue, who is on the hook for this? If insurance sues any one of them, are they going to sue one of the others and assert it was actually their fault?
The only way automated cars actually work is if they're a state held service, where nobody gets sued besides maybe "the government" if someone gets hurt. You can't have automated vehicles under private ownership as a commercial product, with insurance laws being what they are. It's kind of a unique bottleneck for development of the technology, that nobody is happy with. Plus, once the cars are all owned by one group, there's incentive to reduce costs via economy of scale, and now you are on the slippery slope of transportation morphing into trains again.
The same issue doesn't really exist here, kinda. The main problem here is AI is usually utterly contemptuous of copyright and trademark law, so literally everything it does needs to be double and triple checked to make sure it isn't stealing something, and your next gen, AI game doesn't have Mickey Mouse fighting Xenomorphs in the middle.