Holy shit, its logical fallacy over and over with you.
I didn’t make any assumptions. If they can avoid animals now (which they can, and do), they can improve that detection and/or logic for cats that have disappeared under the car and not reappeared. That’s not even an assumption, much less a “big” one.
And you’ve never hit a cat that was hiding under your car? Are you sure? How can you prove it? Have you gotten out each time you drove away to make sure there wasn’t a cat left behind?
And you've driven 93m miles, so you can compare your extensive history and record of driving with waymo’s?
I personally don't like the idea of driverless cars.
And there is your bias.
No one argues self-driving cars are “needed.” The point is, they are a significant improvement over humans when developed correctly.
I have faith that if they keep making errors like this, people won’t give them business. I have faith that they will fix socially unacceptable issues in the name of money.
While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away,
There are plenty of assholes who will aim for cats while driving. This, at least, can likely be remedied fleet-wide and permanently with a software fix. These people are just looking for an excuse to rail against automation— as if a human driver would have definitely seen the cat.
This is a bot ^^