which should not be forbidding this approach until we know it to be dangerous.

No, no, NO. That's not how this works. I didn't sign up to drive on the road you intend to prove your "not dangerous" on. Go prove that shit to be SAFE and then apply to play in traffic, not the other way around.

It is challenging. It’s hard to do QA on neural networks.

I'm sorry, "it's hard" is not a valid excuse for foregoing proof, particularly when playing in the "tons'n'km/h" regime.

Which is the one that is better to put on the road? It’s not a no-brainer.

Sure it is. The coded machine can be examined by everyone and made better. The black box might get better, might get worse, might do completely random, unpredictable shit because it found a corner case to shit all over.

In these cases, we are talking about serious cost, and delays to deployment if it is judged necessary to solve these problems.

Well, shit. Guess we'll have to do it by hand. JUST LIKE THE WAY ACURA INTENDED.

Since robocars are planned as a life-saving technology, each day of delay has serious consequences.

Holy fuck did he just play the "think of the children" card? He just played the "think of the children" card. "Don't make me prove it's safe, children are dying everywhere all day long! Get those infernal drivers away from the wheel!"

Your dude is an asshole.