>easier just to keep a human around on more dangerous routes.
On the contrary, payouts for a driver taken hostage, injured, or killed on company business would be immense. Insurance companies would probably be quite happy about crimes taking place without humans getting hurt anymore.
"Save money on the average payout and you save money overall" is a decent argument if and only if the number of payouts remains fixed, which it most certainly won't.
Having a human present is a significant deterrent against robbing in the first place and against liberal use of firearms because if things go south with a human present then the charge is murder. A robotic truck presents no such deterrent. Lower the risk of knocking off a truck, and more trucks will get knocked off.
I'm not saying it can't be solved, I'm just saying that the solution won't be "buy insurance."
On the contrary, payouts for a driver taken hostage, injured, or killed on company business would be immense. Insurance companies would probably be quite happy about crimes taking place without humans getting hurt anymore.