I think that requires more numerate analysis than you're giving though. The data from the story is a sample size of 11 crashes over three years (I think). If that's really the size of the effect, then your "but [...]" clause seems very suspect.
There are almost two million of these cars on the roads now.
It seems extremely likely that the number of accidents prevented by AP dwarfs this effect, so arguing against it even by implication as you do here seems likely to be doing more harm than good.
That doesn't mean it's not worth investigating what seems like an identifiable edge case in the AP obstacle detection.
But that's a bug fix, not an argument about "Level 2 Autonomy" in general.
I think that requires more numerate analysis than you're giving though. The data from the story is a sample size of 11 crashes over three years (I think). If that's really the size of the effect, then your "but [...]" clause seems very suspect.
There are almost two million of these cars on the roads now. It seems extremely likely that the number of accidents prevented by AP dwarfs this effect, so arguing against it even by implication as you do here seems likely to be doing more harm than good.
That doesn't mean it's not worth investigating what seems like an identifiable edge case in the AP obstacle detection. But that's a bug fix, not an argument about "Level 2 Autonomy" in general.