The same problem exists for every person who enters a vehicle. That very same risk is why there is an economic incentive to do this in the first place. If they succeed far fewer people will die. And it will drive down the costs of commerce improving the quality of life for everyone.

So I take issue when the default perspective is pessimism and dismissiveness. This site is so hostile to founders who aren't doing totally safe projects or gasp those who get millions of dollars without publicly launched products.

Maybe this is just a self-selecting audience of bored pessimistic people who have time to spend commenting on their vague notions of other peoples projects on HN while the optimistic bunch is too busy building their own interesting stuff.

I find Otto a particularly interesting case because they've been pretty quiet with the contents of their tech, so we have very little idea of what they have accomplished yet other than partnering with Volvo and having lots of $$ in the bank. But I'm sure most people here would be fine commenting dismissively just off the headlines they read without really knowing any specific details of the project or the people behind it.

I am also dismayed by the general pessimism in this thread, though I think there is a third (and IMO most likely scenario):

Anyone who has actual direct, inside knowledge of this field will not write publicly about it for a litany of incredibly obvious competition/secrecy reasons. The people most qualified to speak on these matters are staying silent.