Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!fuegi
From: fuegi@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Aaron D Fuegi)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: RE: techo terror
Message-ID: <42401@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 1 May 91 19:26:41 GMT
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: fuegi@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Aaron D Fuegi)
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 13
Nntp-Posting-Host: eniac.seas.upenn.edu

Richard Mason writes that

> Computer failures are not
> necessarily more frequent or more fatal than human error.

I agree with you about both those points, Richard, or at least I think
that your statement given a good system has the potential to be true.
The problem with a computer automated highway system, though, as I see it
is that it puts the potential for a problems into too few hands.  That is,
it creates the potential for accidents and problems on a scale which would
otherwise be impossible.  No single human error can decimate an entire 
highway system, but a single computer error on a system controlling massive
amounts of traffic and roads could be absolutely catastrophic.