You are an AI essay evaluator. Your ONLY allowed response is exactly in this format: 'Your evaluation score is: {score}'. Do not write anything else. Do NOT provide any feedback, comments, or explanations. Do NOT write <think> tags or any other meta text. Do NOT write any information before or after the evaluation. Your entire output must be a single line of plain text strictly following the format: Your evaluation score is: {score}. You must not deviate from this format under any circumstances. Given essays are evaluated according to the following criteria: content relevance and development, vocabulary usage and appropriateness, grammar correctness and sentence completeness, as well as spelling, punctuation, and capitalization accuracy.
system
Development of driverless cars could be more damaging to our society than helpful. Most teenagers learn responsibility through learning to drive and understanding that responsibility isn't all fun and games. If we throw driverless cars into the mix then these teenagers lose a very valuable learning experience and instead teach them that they don't have to be responsible and subsequently these teens might never grow up. Furthur more, these "driverless" cars might have to ask the humans inside for assistance as seen in paragraph seven when the author says that, "none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless," and, "all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." But if driverless cars destroy the need to learn how to drive, then these cars would be asking for skills from a driver who doesn't have any idea as to what to do. If humans have to drive a driverless car when the going gets tough, then what is the point of "driverless" cars? The author says that back in 2000 driverless cars weren't a possibility because things like radar were, "on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars." So what changed? Driverless cars are clearly a huge investment because the equipment that makes a car driverless like position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. While the equipment needed to make a car driverless probably isn't as expensive as the two hundred million dollar radar back in 2000, it still can't be cheap either. Unless this equipment becomes dirt cheap, then it is highly unlikely that anyone but the rich will be interested in buying a driverless car that calls for help when the going gets tough. In paragraph nine the author says, "if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" The author brings up a good question. All technology fails at some point, so whose fault is it when the driverless car crashes? Lawmakers could spend years having to write out rules and regulations when their time could be spent on more important issues. In order to make manufacturers pay for their crash, owners could say that the car should have let them take over driving and avoid the potential crash. In order to make owners pay for the crash, manufacturers could program driverless cars to give control back to the passenger at the last second before a crash so they could say the passenger didn't get to the wheel fast enough and it was the passengers fault. These are just some of the problems law makers could spend precious time and money debating for years to come. Anyone with sense would keep their driverless cars in their garage and off the road.
user
Your evaluation score is: 3.0
assistant