4 ms·

Well, I'd say it's just pride to be so confident in the ability of human engineers to make machines outperform humans consistently (at least in the next few yea

Well, I'd say it's just pride to be so confident in the ability of human engineers to make machines outperform humans consistently (at least in the next few years that vendors want to start selling auto-drivers.) I don't think anyone's doubting whether radar+computer can move faster than a human, but we may doubt whether it will make the "right" reaction and if it might make unwanted decisions in some other cases we don't think of until they happen. And that's just the "AI" level, not stupid things like your electronic throttle's stack overflowing and locking in the open position[1]. [1] http://embeddedgurus.com/state-space/2014/02/are-we-shooting-ourselves-in-the-foot-with-stack-overflow/ http://embeddedgurus.com/state-space/2014/02/are-we-shooting...

dexterdog 11y ago
You speak as if humans are really good at making driving decisions today. We're really not.
- scintill76 11y ago
  I didn't exactly say that. But I think you and others are underestimating our collective skills. We make stupid decisions, get tired, etc., but we manage to recover, workaround others' mistakes, etc. I think people are underestimating how hard it will be to get "the last 10%" of driving skill, that gap between slapping together cruise control+camera+radar+GPS to be able to handle the best-case scenarios, and being able to drive at least as well as the average human in the average-case scenarios. Another thought: what if it takes a generation or longer for self-driving cars to do well with cases like slippery rain or ice? People will stop practicing how to drive at all, until suddenly one day they have to drive in the most dangerous conditions possible. Will the net cost/casualties of accidents still be lower than it is today?
- ghaff 11y ago
  I suppose it depends on what your standard is and what you're comparing it with. The Insurance Institute for highway safety says there is about 1 fatality per 100 million vehicle miles travelled in the US. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit... That still translates into a lot of annual deaths of course (and doesn't capture the many serious injuries not included in that statistic). But humans actually drive a lot of miles with relatively few serious accidents.

dexterdog 11y ago

You speak as if humans are really good at making driving decisions today. We're really not.

scintill76 11y ago
I didn't exactly say that. But I think you and others are underestimating our collective skills. We make stupid decisions, get tired, etc., but we manage to recover, workaround others' mistakes, etc. I think people are underestimating how hard it will be to get "the last 10%" of driving skill, that gap between slapping together cruise control+camera+radar+GPS to be able to handle the best-case scenarios, and being able to drive at least as well as the average human in the average-case scenarios. Another thought: what if it takes a generation or longer for self-driving cars to do well with cases like slippery rain or ice? People will stop practicing how to drive at all, until suddenly one day they have to drive in the most dangerous conditions possible. Will the net cost/casualties of accidents still be lower than it is today?
ghaff 11y ago
I suppose it depends on what your standard is and what you're comparing it with. The Insurance Institute for highway safety says there is about 1 fatality per 100 million vehicle miles travelled in the US. http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit... That still translates into a lot of annual deaths of course (and doesn't capture the many serious injuries not included in that statistic). But humans actually drive a lot of miles with relatively few serious accidents.