	I personally feel that the Stanford One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence as a whole
is, generally speaking, an extremely informative and thoughtful paper. The authors seem very well
educated and confident in their insights and predictions. As such, at this infant stage of my studies 
in the field of Artificial Intelligence, I feel that there are very few things written in this study 
that I can dispute or take issue with. However, one claim that I am skeptical of is that most major
metropolitan cities in America will be primarily using self-driving cars by 2030. There are a few 
reasons that I feel this way.
	The first is that I believe it would take too long to replace so many cars with self-driving
alternatives. Take, as an analagous example, the concept of converting to renewable energy sources from
fossil fuels. Granted, this isn't a one-to-one analogy, but I feel that the base concept rings true. Even 
though we have the technology to achieve this goal, and the benefits would be astronomical, there are so
many smaller hinderances that it becomes a exponentially harder task. On top of dealing with the cost and
construction, the transfer of jobs, and the general overhaul of our infrastructure, we would have to work
around those who would seek to perpetuate the burning of fossil-fuels for their own financial benefit. I
feel that there are plenty of people who are likewise invested in manually driven cars, and the
infrastructural impact would likewise be massive, to the point where I find full deployment of self-driven
cars by 2030 to be a grossly optomistic estimate.  
	Besides the logistical hinderances, I also feel that there are many people who would simply rather
continue driving their car manually. The Study broaches the matter of public trust in A.I., and I
believe it is correct in its assumption that people will slowly come to trust it more and more in coming
decades. In this case however, I believe that it's not a matter of trust, but a matter of preference. I 
can absolutely envision other countries making the switch without too much hesitation, but I feel that 
Americans have romanticized the concept of the automobile, and of "freedom on the open road," to the point
where I believe that many people will refuse to switch simply because "that's just not how cars are 
supposed to be."
	Essentially what I'm trying to say is that it's not a matter of whether or not the technology has 
sufficiently matured, so much as it is unreasonable to expect society to change in such a drastic way in 
so short a time frame. If they were to make their estimate a couple of decades later - say 2040 or 2050 -
then I'd me much more likely to agree. Furthermore, I think a big qualifier is that this study is focusing
on America. If they were to make this estimate regarding Japan, Switzerland, or some other country with a
solid infrastructure, it would seem a lot more feasable.
