I can understand a person being distracted, reacting slowly, not seeing me, etc. I can also mitigate this risk. Crossing the street I can make eye contact with a person and be really confident that they aren’t going to run me over.
Walking in front of a robot? I have no internal model for the kind of mistakes they make. It seems equally likely in any circumstance that they’ll make the mistake of running me down, and there is nothing i can do to avoid it.
Examples:
Elevators where the doors take extremely long to close on their own.
Elevators where the doors close too soon after opening.
Elevators where the limb sensors are not very responsive.
Cars that take a couple of tries to start in cold weather.
Automatic doors that are a little bit slow to open.
Etc.
You would also have to be rather clever in order to get an automatic door to injure you.
A car is also a rather easily understood dynamic system, but that isn’t an issue either. We are all quite frequently in the position of being at between a few seconds and one heartbeat away from a car killing us... walking down a sidewalk, crossing the street, driving on the highway...
We understand pretty well the dynamics of a human driver. Even the drivers that make terrible mistakes we understand something of hope and why.
A robot driver though... the terrible mistakes it makes are mysterious and terrifying. They make the kinds of mistakes a human never would (and few mistakes a human would make).
Maybe a single 'driver' agent in a free-moving ground vehicle in close proximity to vulnerable actors and objects is not the right model for scalable, efficient, safe personal transport?
Not entirely true, the original issue is that the engines are bigger and the center of gravity is moved forward ( because the 737's are too low), thus the planes tend to stall. MCAS is there to correct the stall so that they feel more like 737NGs, but the issue is forcing bigger engines on an obsolete design.
My understanding is none, or nearly none. VNAV follows GPS waypoints with well described, manually designed behaviors for things like climb rate, bank angle, etc.
Autoland isn't machine learning either, and has such a large list of requirements to be allowed that it's basically like designing a self driving computer for a train.
