We reproduce below the opinion article recently published in El Diario Vasco by Jorge Juan Gil, professor at Tecnun-University of Navarra and researcher of Ceit-IK4, in relation to autonomous vehicles.

"Last March, the first fatal pedestrian accident caused by an autonomous car took place. Or should it be called an intelligent vehicle? Safety is a requirement for any device. The sensors installed in autonomous vehicles are designed to detect pedestrians and obstacles, even in the dark. They are always alert. They are not distracted. They do not get tired. They do not fall asleep. And an automated system is capable of reacting much faster than we mere humans. At final, autonomous cars - at least theoretically - can be much safer than vehicles governed by people. So what's the problem?

An automobile is a tremendously sophisticated device, with a very high level of automation. The climate control system regulates the temperature of the cabin, and the ventilation systems, the engine temperature... What elements do we leave to the driver's control guide ? Basically, the speed of the vehicle and the steering. Are we willing to cede to a machine, or to intelligent algorithms, both controls? Today, my answer is "thank you very much, but no." We all know that objects break. Light bulbs melt. Batteries go dead. And volatile memories volatilize.

Would you get into a car driving down a highway at 120 kilometers per hour without someone at the wheel? Really? Many trains already run fully automated. The engineer is merely a supervisor. However, these vehicles run on more enclosed tracks than roads. They are usually one-way, with no possibility of overtaking. Trains do not have obstacle sensors, because that eventuality is not contemplated. Elevators are also an automatic means of transport. Although the first elevator platforms were controlled by guide, modern elevators have evolved until they are completely closed, lest someone should happen to put their hand between the doors. And couldn't that be solved with sophisticated sensors? I bring up these examples because it seems unlikely to me that autonomous cars will be allowed without restricting their use to a safe environment.

Would we approve of our roads becoming much more enclosed to enable automatic vehicle control? Would their infrastructure require greater complexity and maintenance costs? Would that be environmentally friendly and sustainable? In robotics, too, there are strict regulations. Industrial robots must operate within caged enclosures, where a human cannot gain access. This status would like to be changed so that people and robots can work together to perform tasks. To achieve this goal physical barriers must be removed, but - as a counterpart - robots must possess more perceptive capabilities of their environment (proximity sensors and contact) and, above all, operate with much smaller speed and force levels. Would we give up control of our vehicle at the cost of moving with much more limited speed levels than at present?

Some arguments in favor of autonomous cars are also troubling. Proponents claim that they would have fewer accidents than manual cars. Why? Because there are people who drive like crazy, drunk... In other words, we are the problem. It is true that machines will replace us in activities that they do better than us because they require more strength or precision, they are developed in toxic or high-risk areas, or simply because they are very repetitive jobs. But we should not allow machines to replace us, because some people are irresponsible. I would rather improve Education than bet on supplanting".