Ready for cars with computers as driver? No? Good, because the computers aren’t ready either. But have no doubt, they are coming.

Those in favor of completely automated driving cite these benefits:

Less deaths, injuries, and accidents. Today one million injuries per year in the United States alone. No more drunk driving, no more distracted driving. Less wasted time in commuting – the time can be spent reading, sleeping, working or on conversation. Increased energy efficiency. Cars will travel in platoons, so the drafting effect will reduce air resistance. No more sudden starts and stops, reducing air pollution.

Those opposed cite these problems:



Loss of the feeling of control: turning our lives over to some invisible machines. Driving, for many, is fun and engaging. This takes away one of the great pleasures of life. Yet another technology that takes away jobs. According to NPR, truck driving is one of the largest categories of jobs in the United States. What happens to all these people?

Is it true? Can the cars take over most of the driving? Yes, this will definitely be true. Today, many advanced cars can drive themselves on highways.


Can the cars work in city traffic? Cities have confusing signs and street markings, pedestrians and bicyclists. At the Design Lab at UC San Diego, we have filmed streets, observing skateboarders zooming down sidewalks into the streets, people crossing even major city streets with eyes firmly fixed on phones or tablets. The city is the biggest challenge.

Whether you are fan or foe of completely autonomous vehicles, note that it will be decades before we have full automation of cars. One of the most difficult problems is the transition: from (A) manual driving, to (B) mostly automatic, to (C) mostly-but-not-quite-fully-automated, and (D) fully autonomous. Today we have a mix of A and B with companies experimenting with C. I fear C. Why? Cars at this level require a person to sit at the wheel, ready to take over when the automation fails (California law requires this). Today, the introduction of safety features in level B such as lane change warning, blind-spot indicators, stability control, anti-lock braking, and automatic braking if about to collide has reduced injuries.

Why is C so dangerous? Because the more reliable the automation, the less likely the driver will be to respond in time for corrective action. Studies of airline pilots who routinely fly completely automated airplanes show this (as do numerous studies over the past six decades by experimental psychologists). When there is little to do, attention wanders. How long does it take a non-attentive driver to detect a problem, analyze it, and respond? Note that at 60 mph a car travels 90 feet per second. In aviation, when unexpected incidents occur it can take tens of seconds for well-trained pilots to respond, sometimes minutes to figure out what to do. But an airplane is high in the sky: the pilots are well trained and have several minutes of time. In the automobile, drivers are not nearly as well-trained, yet may have to respond in seconds.

Many studies demonstrate that the most dangerous automation is the partial automation of state C: “Ironies of automation” is the title of one famous paper on the topic. Safety features in today’s level B cars do not pose difficulties because the driver is still actively driving. At C, the driver is no longer driving, just monitoring. The step from B to C to D is so problematical that I recommend doing it more quickly: go directly to D, avoiding the dangerous partial automation that leaves the driver with nothing to do most of the time.


I am convinced that good automation, even if imperfect, is still far better than today’s imperfect drivers. Worse, as automobile manufacturers rush to add better entertainment systems, heads-up displays that show entertainment options or message texts, drivers are subject to even more distractions. Automation gets better and better while drivers become more and more distracted.

Some day we will have fully autonomous cars, which will lead to major societal changes. Automobile companies will have to change their business models. Truck and taxi driving is a major source of jobs in the United States: what happens to these people as their jobs are no longer necessary?

The tremendous saving of lives and injuries is strong support for the development of autonomous vehicles. However, the relentless automation of all that can be automated is not a good thing for society. At the UC San Diego Design Lab we are exploring ways of making technology the servant of people. We aim for human-technology teamwork: augmentation, not replacement. Our research has just begun: Stay tuned.