トピ：The reading passage and the lecture both deal with smart cars.
While the author presents three arguments to support it, the lecturer makes counterarguments against them.
First, the reading passage argues that smart cars will prevent many accidents, thereby saving lives.
However, according to the lecture, technology advancement will failed occasionally. Smart cars will cause more accidents. The cars will be packed more tightly on the roads. And when accidents occurred it will pileups and involved more cars, this will make the accidents more serious.
Second, the reading passage mentions that with the use of smart cars, traffic problems will practically disappear.
On the other hand, the lecturer points out that when driving become more convenient, more and more people will decide to drive because they expect an easier driving experience. And this will cause traffic congestion and people can't decrease their commuting time.
Third, the reading passage says that smart cars will bring a reduction in the costs of driving.
But the lecturer questions the validity of this opinion, he says that it's not reasonable to expect that smart cars will save drivers money. The advanced technology of smart cars will make repairs to them more expensive than repairs on conventional automobiles.
Thus, in the opinion of the lecturer, the main argument of the passage proves wrong.
