2 ms·
That's the point though... people who want 100% perfect automation have no leg to stand on when presented with a more reliable option than a human. That's not t
by M_Grey 10y ago
That's the point though... people who want 100% perfect automation have no leg to stand on when presented with a more reliable option than a human. That's not the case with speech recognition yet, and I'd say as a result people would be well justified in demanding at least as much capability as they're capable of themselves.
- taneq 10y agoReally? I expect there to be huge resistance to driverless cars (at first) as people come up with crazy scenarios in which they're certain that their own elite driving skills could save them but the car could not. Then there'll be a reversal as people start to actually accept that the car is a better driver than they are, and surprisingly quickly they'll start saying anyone who wants to drive manually is a dangerous egotist.
- M_Grey 10y agoMaybe, but the "upside" of humans being such terrible drivers is that we've almost all either gotten into a bad accident, or know someone close who has. The fact that it's not going to be hard to empirically prove a difference between machine reliability in this case, and human reliability may help as well. Unfortunately... I think the big issue is going to be pure anxiety; a bigger and more immediate form of what a lot of people experience on an airplane. Giving up even the illusion of control is supremely hard for us as a species, in general. Then there's just the fact that as a species we're terrible at risk assessment. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/11/perceived_risk_2.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/11/perceived_ris...