As technology advances, our desires, expectations and integration of artificial intelligence into our daily lives also increases as we become more dependent and seek for the convenience that computers provide. Consumers cannot forecast what the new technological breakthrough would entitle. While they don’t solve any issues of the consumer’s current lifestyle, they instead create a new demand of products as they generate a want that the consumer didn’t previously know they wanted in their life.

One of these innovative creations include the series of self-driving technology. But the risk of fully relying on technology and making the act of human intervention completely redundant includes the blind reliance of programs which carry unknown algorithmic bugs and errors. An example of an incident involving ‘smart cars’ was seen where a self-driving shuttle bus crashed during it’s first day of service in Las Vegas.

But contrary to initial thoughts, professionals argue that these incidents are at the fault of the human error within the situation, in this case, the fault of the lorry driver whom was also involved in the accident who reportedly drove at slow speed. But despite this claim from technological professionals, I argue that these incidences of accidents, while they may not be at the primary fault of the actual product of transportation, can cause for the reputational security of the automated item to drop as customers feel less secure about a service they already had doubts in beforehand due to the uneasiness that comes with innovation. So although the fault was not catalyzed by the business themselves, this is a form of indirect marketing that is unbeneficial for the business, because as we learnt in class before, everything communicates.

On the other hand, some may choose to impetuously trust in the capabilities of the programmed product until reaching a reproachable situation. Using an approach explained by a blog by Linda Bailey, another ironic safety hazard for the consumer is the false sense of security from purchasing a product of automation as “drivers think they can tune out and the car will do the work”. In the context of the value proposition canvas, as consumers put full reliance on the product of automated cars which acts as their pain reliever to their pain of having to drive, they forget that it is still a product with possible error, despite the proposed value proposition of being ‘self-dependent’.

As a result, I would like to ask if the convenience given by automated technology be able to compensate for the health and safety of the consumer? Especially as this technology is still in the developing process, would human-made products ever be sufficiently developed to withstand the responsibility of human-life?

Word count: 448