as well as sensors. Cameras today are mandatory in police and highway patrol vehicles. Racing vehicles today are replete with cameras that tell you in HD what happened, how, when, and where. Today Benzes send an alarm when you fall asleep while driving. And all of the above does not preclude the addition of a "black box" to the driver-less car that can store all pertinent info about a trip.
There are almost no more room for human driving to be safe, as it is unsafe almost in its entirety already. How worse can it get by adding an autopilot? Not a lot: less than one in ten parts.
I foresee insurance companies raising your premiums for not having an autopilot in a near future ;-) Have e great remain of the weekend!

conditions that could interfere with safe driving.
4. Humans are stubborn: we do not drive 100% according to traffic signs. We do not respect them.
5. Now consider the fact that vehicles sales increase by a geometric series: www.calculatedriskblog.com/.../us-light-vehicle-sales-increase-to-154.ht. Add to this the fact that cars are faster and lighter every year. In other words: at the current pace, driving safely will be impossible, and cannot be left alone to traffic signs posted on the road, traffic tickets and driving schools.
I don't know if I made my point already. I am trying to say that car accidents and human violations go hand in hand. Who did what when, where and how? That could be answered by video cameras connected to the car

@Xiaolong: Thank you for your reply. That was a good question
1. Who was driving at the time of the accident?. Was the vehicle being driven by a driver or by the autopilot?
2. 90% of vehicle accidents are caused by human error: www.alertdriving.com/home.
3. Self-driving will always be safer than driving driving under influence, exhaustion, reckless driving (speeding, talking on the phone, etc.) and road rage. I am not including those scenarios when you would be better off staying home, yet you decide to take your car and go out: you have a migraine, you are running a fever, you have a bad cold, you did not sleep well last night, you have unfinished businesses at home or at work etc. I am not going to include certain chronic human

Driver-less driving will look stupid today, but it will be a lot better sooner than later, like with everything else electronic. It will come as an option, obviously, and will not preclude inclusion of menu with all kind of driving modes, including sports. It is happening in small vehicles as they are easier to control, but the target IMO are the big ones. I foresee highway freight in the future controlled by autopilots for the most part as they will be safer, and they will save time, resources, and money.

on the fast lane, rain, etc. Self driving will be definitely important when decisions need to be made in a time frame shorter than the human reaction time. This will make "elderly driving", a real menace at times, a lot safer. Furthermore, safe-driving will give you support even when your 5 senses will not be able to help: intersections, fast approaching vehicles on the wrong way, unexpected animal crossing, etc. Of course, you will not have to use it to do grocery shopping, but it would be especially helpful to use on that day when after spending an entire sleepless weekend you still needed the extra time at work to turn in that project, late at night ,and then you had to drive back home...

@Xiaolong: Here is the point, The self driving vehicle is the future. It will be to vehicles what autopilots are to airplanes today. No air or insurance company will trust a single pilot regardless of his expertise the safety of 500 passengers in a 4-engine airplane for a flight across the ocean under unpredictable weather conditions for 8-12 hours at times when thousand of other airplanes are doing the same thing. I've been driving 60 miles per day average (highway and city) for the last 15 years and the "drivers" among us do not enjoy sitting in traffic while a congestion, which may last minutes to hours and guess what: they are not always caused by accidents; many a time they are caused by simple human distraction, slow vehicles moving

I don't know why I have this funny feeling that the new asset for Tesla is not going to make their cars more affordable to buy...

Fuel cell technology in cars may be a technological breakthrough and it will continue to get cheaper in time, but there is a problem with hydrogen: it is not a source of energy like gasoline is. 95% of available H2 is obtained by electrolysis of H2O or by overheating hydrocarbons. Both ways involve the burn of charcoal or fossil fuels. So, hydrogen does not reduce the CO2 footprint nor does it reduce the demand of hydrocarbons. Natural gas may sound like a solution but its combustion produces water vapor, which is the "greenest" of gases; by far greener than CO2 (green here means causing global warming). If nuclear energy cannot be a short term solution to produce electricity, "solar" may be the best way to go (IMHO). Go solar! ;-)

"2014 Chevy Spark EV First With CCS Quick-Charge Port". That is a start, but far from being a global solution. I think state and federal authorities should give tax breaks and incentives to car manufacturers that provide EV infrastructure support. Nuclear electricity was the solution to lower the costs of electricity, but after the Japan disaster, nuclear power plants' proliferation will be out of the equation for a long time. The EV revolution is not going to happen until solar electricity hits big cities meeting the needs of customers living in apartment buildings. State authorities should give contractors incentives also to build solar parking lots in apartment buildings, shopping malls, and public schools.

sell infrastructure in addition to their cars if they want to be in business (good luck with that!) In know for example that BMW is considering selling solar car ports to power their Ev's. Thinking like a CEO, will that be cost effective?