5 ms·
It's not entirely humans' fault, even when humans are at fault. Road implementation is a contributing factor, for example. I'm amazed that so many people in te
by a3n 11y ago
It's not entirely humans' fault, even when humans are at fault. Road implementation is a contributing factor, for example.
I'm amazed that so many people in technology think that these rolling physical software boxes are going to be reliable enough to be better than us. We're pretty good at processing new, ambiguous situations.
We can't even build a secure internet. Which, by the way, these cars will be part of.
I think what will happen is that some accident categories will go down, others involving autonomous cars will go up, and there will be a lot of instances of people who can't get where they need to go because the car can't figure out some ambiguous situation.
Or a car will try to follow a Google route that goes around a block three times before it's (hopefully) finally routed on its way. And there will be rare instances of cars trying to drive to Ireland through the Pacific Ocean.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> It's not entirely humans' fault, even when humans are at fault. Yes, it is. > Road implementation is a contributing factor, for example. "Road implementation" is done by humans, so, even if it is a contributing factor, that doesn't make it any less humans' fault.
- twinkletwinkle 11y agoYou're intentionally mis-understanding what he wrote. He means it isn't always the human driver's fault. Driverless cars aren't going to re-implement roads (not at first, not for a while).
- zyxley 11y ago> And there will be rare instances of cars trying to drive to Ireland through the Pacific Ocean. It's silly to assume that a car is going to trust a mapping service over its own sensors saying "there's no road or path here". That said, I absolutely do expect cases of "I wanted to visit a friend in the next state, fell asleep overnight, and woke up in a different town of the same name eight states away".
- fucking_tragedy 11y agoThe idea of software developers deciding how a 2-ton hunk of metal and plastic should whip around the road at 70mph is horrifying. Even with MISRA, we had the Toyota unintended acceleration case (not to say the developers were following it though. Grab the court transcripts if you have the time, they're brilliant). Probably dozens of other corner cases we'll never know about either.
- Aelinsaar 11y agoIf those accident categories are the ones that don't include fatalities or even injures (which is likely) then it's a win. Computers and computer vision systems are probably less likely to fail on a highway, than a human is. Computers can also integrate road data in ways that humans can't. To be honest, I think the argument you're offering is just the reason why we'll start seeing automation of route-following vehicles first. Trucks, buses, and taxis going to airports and hotels, don't necessarily have hard route-finding problems. You also say things like "Can't build a secure internet" as though that's ever been tried, or necessary in this case.