3 ms·
I don't know how much Google is perfecting the technology, but I agree with the sentiment about the other car makers. There should be the equivalent of a "do no
by thr0waway1239 10y ago
I don't know how much Google is perfecting the technology, but I agree with the sentiment about the other car makers. There should be the equivalent of a "do no harm" first approach when AI technology crosses some threshold and goes into life-or-death territory. People who talk about how computers are safer drivers than humans in the aggregate still don't seem to ask questions about the split second decisions humans can take when they are about to crash (and in general, all the pattern matching instincts humans have in potential crash situations)
http://bogbit.com/vancouver-man-sacrifices-self-to-save-wife-unborn-child/ http://bogbit.com/vancouver-man-sacrifices-self-to-save-wife...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- SamPhillips 10y agoSure, but there are those 30,000-50,000[0] times a year that humans get it wrong too. Would you rather have surgery from a human with a 90% success rate but a 0.0001% of a heroic save, or a robot with a 98% success rate, with the bonus that the robot will only be getting better with more adoption. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_i...
- thr0waway1239 10y agoPlease provide a reference to your comment about where robots are used completely unsupervised in surgery so we know the comparison is similar. The marketing message from autonomous car makers is that you can not only take your hands off the wheel and your eyes off the road, but also that you can put your full attention to a completely different task.