Carr writes his article with passion and self-stake. He tells us his embarrassing story as a sixteen-year-old struggling to operate a manual transmission as his friend harassed his failures. This provides a story a lot of his readers can relate to as he gains are interest and pulls us in to read more. He goes on to talk of his boredom when he begins to drive a car equipped with an automatic transmission and loses his sense of connection to driving. This leads him into explaining his ideal on the self-driven car or autopilot google car. Being very in depth he explains the concept of the google car and what is has the ability to do and has already done. As he discusses this topic he poses an excellent and thought provoking question, “Where […] will culpability and liability reside should a computer-driven automobile cause an accident that kills or injures some one? With the car’s owner? With the manufacturer that installed the self-driving system?”. I cannot answer this without being completely bias. I am against technology taking over a skill that should be accomplished by a living breathing human. Humans possess the ability to make humane decisions in a conscious state of mind. The fact that robots would be making decisions based of pre-programed situations does not sit well with me because of the unknown of the road. I would have to say the blame of a motor vehicle accident involving a car on autopilot would fall on the driver of the vehicle because he made the conscious decision to used autopilot. If the car was absent a driver than it would have to fall on the car company by default. This question alludes to Carr’s change of tone from last article. He is more serious and professional in this article. The topic discussed calls for a certain type of tone in order to persuade the appropriate message to readers. As Carr used his serious almost even concerned tone I was convinced to buy in with his argument and became quite interested.