• Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    it’s the really stupid, obvious things

    Hm. Interesting. But that makes them look even mode incapable than I feared.

    • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Broadly speaking, an AI driver getting stumped means it’s stuck in the middle of the road - while a human driver getting stumped means plowing into a semi truck.

      I’d rather be inconvenienced than killed. And from what I’ve seen, even our current AI drivers are already statistically safer than the average human driver - and they’re only going to keep getting better.

      They’ll never be flawless though. Nothing is.

      • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Ai drivers have run over and crushed people slowly before too though because they didn’t see the person as an “obstacle” to be avoided, or because they were on the ground, it didn’t see them

        • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 hours ago

          And they always will. You need to look at the big picture here, not individual cases. If we replaced every single car on US roads with one driven by AI - proven to be 10 times better a driver than a human - that would still mean 4,000 people getting killed by them each year. That, however, doesn’t mean we should go back to human drivers and 40,000 people killed annually.

          • ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            You need to look at the big picture here, not individual cases.

            By that logic…

            We should really be investing in trains and buses, not cars of any type.

            • walden@wetshav.ing
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 hours ago

              I think your logic is flawed. The discussion is about a specific form of transportation. By your own logic, you should be suggesting that people fly everywhere.

              • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 hours ago

                Yes. AI human transformation drones make far more sense. Much easier to avoid things because airspace can be controlled. Just need to figure out how to do efficiently that the ride is more than 5 minutes.

              • ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                For long distance maybe, but immediately saying we should all fly everywhere because it has the fewest deaths per passenger mile would really not be looking at the big picture.

                • walden@wetshav.ing
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  51 minutes ago

                  Ah, so you do understand there’s a difference in why someone would chose one type of transportation over another.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              5 hours ago

              That’s Tesla, not Waymo. Tesla’s hardware is shit and does not even include lidar. You can’t judge the entire industry by the worst example.

              • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                5 hours ago

                New HW4 Teslas do in fact include a front-facing radar, but it’s currently only used for collecting data - not for FSD.

                Still, gotta give them credit for getting by with vision-only quite well. I don’t personally see any practical reason why you absolutely must include LiDAR. We already know driving relatively safely with vision only is possible - all the best drivers in the world do it.

                • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  43 minutes ago

                  LiDAR lets you see better than humans, so why wouldn’t you use it? What about fog, darkness, or other common roadside conditions?

                  Ignoring the best sensors means they can never surpass the safety of other self-driving vehicles. It was short sighted (pun intended) to remove that hardware. They have intentionally crippled their vehicles.

            • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Tesla made the idiotic decision to rely entirely on cameras, waymo used lidar and other sensors to augment vision.

      • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        current AI drivers are already statistically safer than

        As long as they use level 3 autonomous cars and then cheat with remote operators instead of using real level 5 cars, such statistics remain quite meaningless.

        However, they tell about the people who use them as arguments.

        • errer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          As the OP stated, the low velocity cases are not causing deadly accidents. And you can’t drive by wire at high speed (too much latency). So I doubt it’s affecting the stats in any meaningful way.

          Honestly I much prefer they have a human as a backup than not.

          • [deleted]@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            As the OP stated, the low velocity cases are not causing deadly accidents.

            Make humans drive as slow as these cars and deaths will drop too.