Many of us have heard of Google's autonomous cars project, which is simultaneously terrifying and amazing. Now let's make the following assumptions: (1) assume we reach a hypothetical future where you have affordable autonomous cars that can essentially drive anywhere at any time; and (2) assume that studies show that an autonomously operated vehicle is safer than a human operated one, and that roads predominantly driven by autonomous cars are not only safer than roads predominantly driven by humans, but have less traffic. (After all, driving is really just math and geometry and physics, things a sophisticated enough number crunching machine could handle almost perfectly.) With those two assumptions in mind, assume that the powers that be begin debating whether it is wise to continue allowing humans to drive. Humans, after all, do human things like: fall asleep at the wheel, speed, merge poorly in traffic, brake too late, get drunk and drive, fail to look in their blind spots, send text messages or do their makeup while driving, and are generally (compared to their computer controlled cars) clumsy, foolhardy and reckless meat sacks operating large steel death machines. With all that said, would you be on the side of those saying no, driving is a cherished right and we should be allowed to continue driving on public roads even if studies show it is more harmful to do so? Or do you side with the folks arguing that less people will die or become harmed and we will all get where we need to go quicker if we let our computer overlords take us where we want to go? As fun as driving can be, I for one would welcome our new driving overlords. I have had this thought a few times since hearing about the Google car project a few years ago and the more I think about it, the more I think this will become an issue. Mainly because I do believe that ultimately, a road populated entirely with autonomous driving machines would be much, much safer and efficient than the current system we have now.