Raw LLM Responses

More 'either/or' thinking: either driverless trucks or trucks controlled by fallible drivers (who also sometimes end up dead in an accident). A company in China called Inceptio (there are You Tube videos on their story) is just like Aurora except that always have a human driver in the seat. Their system has driven millions of kilometers without a single accident. Not either/or but both. The driverless system like Aurora's to drive and the human to intervene when there is a problem that the computer can't handle (like cows in the road). Then there is the union--'Teamsters' is practically synonymous with 'corrupt'. They have never figured out that the drivers are so much more than merely 'butts in the seats'; they serve as security for the cargo (the good ones), and even ambassadors for the product they are hauling. A driverless truck that gets in an accident--with injuries and fatalities--will be confronted by a jury that will simply ask 'How much money did you make automating this business?' and then giving that amount to the survivors. But if the driverless computer is tied to a human, the savings in insurance costs alone will allow the companies to pay the drivers that go along much more than currently. Plus less accidents mean less money to buy new trucks and replace lost product. The union should be pointing this out but they are too busy complaining.