Nope, the current and upcoming drone regulations specifically prohibit operation of commercial drones over moving vehicles such as cars and boats. The FAA does not trust current control systems to not inject a crashing drone into a high energy traffic flow or just into a fast moving vehicle. Any possible incidents…

You will NEVER see or experience an airliner crash, EVER. It’s just that astronomically unlikely.

Nope, the laws apply specifically to COMMERCIAL operations of drones, with a very small subset of rules for hobby flyers including registration. Any of the few shootdowns you’ve seen news about were just hobby drones.

No, not applicable at all. Those FAA regulations are a FEDERAL OFFENSE, along with all the nifty investigatory powers of the FBI, NTSB, FAA, ATF, Federal Marshals or any other agency that feels it needs to be involved.

It’s Gawker-land, they also can’t refer to sex unless they use the term “fucking” provocatively. I’ve mentioned it, they don’t care.

It’s interesting that you mention it, because I saw the same stutter before forward motion in the mini driver’s attempt even before I saw the VW run. And you can see it again in his attempt with the Fiat 500.

Because it isn’t that simple. In racing, team efforts lead to a win primarily for an individual, and secondarily for a team/builder/manufacturer. In football all the team efforts combine to a win for the team only. So racing is not entirely a “team sport”, it has SOME elements of it.

Taxicabs, buses, police cars, trains, and airliners also all wear out at accelerated rates. And so will fleets of autonomous cars, okay, we agree.

You keep shifting the discussion to personally owned cars, and existing extremely inefficient taxi fleets. That is not even close to the efficiency of a fleet of computerized cabs that can optimize both every route and every traffic flow of every trip they make.

That’s the answer to your original question. There simply isn’t enough budget in the U.S. to build and maintain the required lengths of railway compared to a tiny nation like Japan. Not even close, the money simply isn’t there.

Nope because the car’s performance/maintenance/obsolescence is entirely the autonomous car fleet owner’s problem, not the passenger’s. You won’t have any idea or care whatsoever “how fast the car is wearing out”. Do you worry about that with taxis, buses, or airliners? Nope, you just rent their time, deal done.

Because individual ownership of cars will become even more of a luxury that few will want to endure. Insurance companies in particular will be penalizing heavily those who decide to drive themselves.

Nope, not now, not EVER. I look to professionally vetted, managed and trained organizations for consumer watchdog services. Forum groups of random amateur complainers will never be useful for anything.

Hobbyists use loads of super glue, the bottles need to be at least eye drops size to even last a month.

AJ Foyt: Been there, done that.

At this point, it’s not even about making a “perfect” autonomous car. Simply removing the liability risk for human drivers by replacing them with an occasional automatic car incident is immediately a win-win. Humans refuse to get and maintain high level training, and many of them are willing to operate cars while…

No, that’s exactly the OPPOSITE of how they’re going to reduce their liability. Humans are the HUGE liability in current regular road operations. Car manufacturers are looking with massive relief to the future in removing their largest headache, poorly trained and impaired humans.

I will disagree right back.

Neat calculations, still not applicable since you’re ignoring my point that the main obstacle to a higher top speed is its engine, and you’re still wrong about electronic limiting.

In the abstract of just physics with no friction and pure forces, you are correct.