4 ms·
> That's not true. The software is designed to work under human supervision It was not designed to work under human supervision, but even if it was, that desig
by dimino 10y ago
> That's not true. The software is designed to work under human supervision
It was not designed to work under human supervision, but even if it was, that design was wrong, and the design was broken from the start.
- mikeash 10y agoWhat is your basis for the statement that it was not designed to work under human supervision? The documentation is quite explicit about needing human supervision, and I see nothing whatsoever indicating anything otherwise.
- dimino 10y agohttps://www.teslamotors.com/models https://www.teslamotors.com/models "Digital control of motors, brakes, and steering helps avoid collisions from the front and sides, and prevents the car from wandering off the road." It's designed to avoid collisions from the front and sides.
- mikeash 10y agoThe use of the word "helps" makes it pretty clear that it's not intended to be the only thing working to avoid collisions.
- dimino 10y agoNo it doesn't. And you're still ignoring the part where I said it doesn't matter if it was designed intentionally this way or not, it shouldn't behave this way, regardless.
- mikeash 10y agoReally, you think that "X helps Y" is compatible with X being intended as the sole thing performing Y? If so, we clearly speak fundamentally different languages, despite the superficial similarities in spelling and such. As for ignoring the other part, I explicitly acknowledged in my original reply that this would be a valid criticism, and it's not something I feel strongly enough about to argue.
- dimino 10y agoI didn't say "x being intended as the sole thing performing Y", I said, "It's designed to avoid collisions from the front and sides.", which it was.
- mikeash 10y agoYou said it's designed to work without human supervision. Unless you're proposing some third entity besides the car and the human which would be responsible for collision avoidance, then what you said is that the car is fully responsible for it.
- dimino 10y ago> You said it's designed to work without human supervision. When?
- mikeash 10y ago"It was not designed to work under human supervision...." I don't know how else to understand that other than that it was designed to work without human supervision. If that's not what you meant, perhaps you could elaborate.
- dimino 10y agoI meant what I said. Collision detection was not designed to work under human supervision, which means when it runs into something, it has failed its design. Tesla cars are not designed to run into things.
- simoncion 10y ago> Collision detection was not designed to work under human supervision, which means when it runs into something, it has failed its design. From your quote upthread: > "Digital control of motors, brakes, and steering helps avoid collisions from the front and sides, and prevents the car from wandering off the road." (Emphasis mine.) Notice the shift in language from "helps avoid" to "prevents" when describing the two different aspects of the car's thrust and positioning systems. The different is significant and important. It's clear that the systems are a front and side collision assistance system, not a front and side collision prevention system. You see the distinction?