Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Google Study Says Its Robot Cars Are Safer Than Normal Ones, Thank You Very Much

Yet again, Google makes the case its self-driving cars are super safe.

Google via Google Plus

What to do when an academic study says your robot cars might be more dangerous than regular cars? Hire your own academic!

That’s what Google did.

On Friday, a study came out from Virginia Tech, commissioned by the Internet giant, claiming to offer the first apples-to-apples comparison between conventional vehicles and self-driving ones. The study looked at Google’s autonomous cars, which have logged over 1.3 million miles, and found that they have a lower crash rate (3.2 accidents per million miles) than national rates (4.2 crashes per million).

The research comes two months after another study that said quite the opposite. That one, from the University of Michigan, looked at Google’s cars, plus self-driving vehicles from Delphi and Volkswagen, and found they are more accident prone.

This is a major fixation of Google’s self-driving car unit, which is set to become its own Alphabet company that will — everyone (like, everyone) in the industry believes — be in the business of robot taxi fleets. Google has reported each of its incidents, noting that they are all caused by human error. (Often, it seems, curious drivers of other cars are distracted or lured closed by the weird robots on wheels.)

But regulators and consumers will only be watching autonomous vehicles more closely. And anything that suggests they are dangerous throws a wrench in Google’s plans.

The Virginia Tech report points to a big flaw in earlier studies: Most drivers don’t report minor accidents. Google does. When that’s factored in, self-driving cars are safer.

But the Michigan study also controlled for that and found similar results. More importantly, that study didn’t have a strong enough statistical significance — i.e. the findings could be bunk.

Still, it seems Google finds reports like these worth the time and money to shoot down. After all, you can’t bring a knife to a robot fight.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh