3 ms·
One person can build something that starts a revolution. See Woz/Apple. The real issue here is that self-driving cars are probably the wrong place for that to
by webmasterraj 11y ago
One person can build something that starts a revolution. See Woz/Apple.
The real issue here is that self-driving cars are probably the wrong place for that to happen in AI. At best, a solo project creates a crappy prototype where there was no product before (again, see Woz/Apple). The expectation for driverless cars is too high – they need to be 100% good, because your life is on the line, not 80% good.
What's the AI project that would blow people away, even if it was a shadow of a working prototype? I think that's the real question.
- oldmanjay 11y agoI don't follow why AI vehicles need to be 100% good. Plain old human-driven vehicles sure aren't and we accept their utility as being worth the trade.
- rolux 11y agoIn one word: liability.
- elliottpayne 11y agoIn two words: actuarial tables
- unclebucknasty 11y agoImagine the day an AI vehicle causes an accident that otherwise would not have happened. Even if AI cars are statistically better than humans on average, it's an issue of control. It's true that most accidents are avoidable and caused by human error, but most people are (perhaps overly) confident in their own ability to drive safely (this is also why people text and drive).
- dclowd9901 11y agoWe, as the flawed beings we are, can't accept both giving up control and not getting guaranteed safety as a result.
- tim333 11y ago>What's the AI project that would blow people away, even if it was a shadow of a working prototype? Robot that can build a better robot?