3 ms·

My scuba instructor shared this piece of wisdom: "You don't have to swim faster than the shark. You just need to swim faster than your buddy." People get this

by bhntr3 10y ago

My scuba instructor shared this piece of wisdom: "You don't have to swim faster than the shark. You just need to swim faster than your buddy." People get this stuff wrong all the time. Especially when they're drunk, tired or texting. These cars won't be perfect but I think pretty good and conservative under uncertainty will be better than human, drunk and overconfident.

ticviking 10y ago
That's a key point here. The cars don't have to be perfectly safe, just safer than the average driver.
- woofyman 10y ago
  It has be better than the best human driver or they'll get sued out of existance. You can't sell a product that you know will hurt or kill a certain number of people.
  - deadbunny 10y ago
    I'm pretty sure the car industry has been doing that for years.
    - woofyman 10y ago
      They get sued if they knowingly sell a defective product.
  - ageofwant 10y ago
    Sorry no. Cars kill thousands of people every year, and will continue to do so. Car companies are doing just fine. Power companies literally kill millions every year, a-ok. McDonalds, Coca Cola ? ditto.
    - woofyman 10y ago
      Drivers kill, not the cars. That's totally different from an autonomous car killing someone. Humans make mistakes. That's different from a defective product.
      - ageofwant 10y ago
        And then it gets fixed, just like with current defects on current cars. Why should it be any different ?
      - CN7R 10y ago
        I feel like debate about autonomous cars extends ideas of "who's to blame -- the human or the gun?"
  - bhntr3 10y ago
    What happened to worst case analysis? Don't we all know the flaws of best case? I think (and I could be wrong) that there are many more cases where conservative driving is safer than aggressive driving. In a lot of the cases mentioned, doing nothing or stopping are the safest choices. What's safe to drive over? Just assume everything is unsafe and only drive over it if it puts others in danger to avoid it. If the road is blocked and you need to communicate to navigate, don't. Wait. If the road conditions are changed due to construction in ways the car can't understand, stop. Find a new route. Most humans wouldn't do these things. The nice thing about the autonomous car is that it can drive extremely cautiously.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  It's true, but is it better? Are there statistics? It's true that humans do stupid things, but so do robots. What would be _safer_ is an automated "hit" avoid system (if you're about to hit a wall, warn!!) or long distance driving system (for trucks/buses).
- legolas2412 10y ago
  Not to get personal, but I'm getting tired of seeing this argument. Why are people looking at the extremes? Only human drivers or a completely self driven car? What about a driver assistance system, that corrects a Human's stupid mistakes and still lets the human drive. I'm sure this hybrid (which is the current industry) is safer than both your extremes

by bhntr3 10y ago

ticviking 10y ago

That's a key point here. The cars don't have to be perfectly safe, just safer than the average driver.

woofyman 10y ago
It has be better than the best human driver or they'll get sued out of existance. You can't sell a product that you know will hurt or kill a certain number of people.
- deadbunny 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure the car industry has been doing that for years.
  - woofyman 10y ago
    They get sued if they knowingly sell a defective product.
- ageofwant 10y ago
  Sorry no. Cars kill thousands of people every year, and will continue to do so. Car companies are doing just fine. Power companies literally kill millions every year, a-ok. McDonalds, Coca Cola ? ditto.
  - woofyman 10y ago
    Drivers kill, not the cars. That's totally different from an autonomous car killing someone. Humans make mistakes. That's different from a defective product.
    - ageofwant 10y ago
      And then it gets fixed, just like with current defects on current cars. Why should it be any different ?
    - CN7R 10y ago
      I feel like debate about autonomous cars extends ideas of "who's to blame -- the human or the gun?"
- bhntr3 10y ago
  What happened to worst case analysis? Don't we all know the flaws of best case? I think (and I could be wrong) that there are many more cases where conservative driving is safer than aggressive driving. In a lot of the cases mentioned, doing nothing or stopping are the safest choices. What's safe to drive over? Just assume everything is unsafe and only drive over it if it puts others in danger to avoid it. If the road is blocked and you need to communicate to navigate, don't. Wait. If the road conditions are changed due to construction in ways the car can't understand, stop. Find a new route. Most humans wouldn't do these things. The nice thing about the autonomous car is that it can drive extremely cautiously.
dispose13432 10y ago
It's true, but is it better? Are there statistics? It's true that humans do stupid things, but so do robots. What would be _safer_ is an automated "hit" avoid system (if you're about to hit a wall, warn!!) or long distance driving system (for trucks/buses).
legolas2412 10y ago
Not to get personal, but I'm getting tired of seeing this argument. Why are people looking at the extremes? Only human drivers or a completely self driven car? What about a driver assistance system, that corrects a Human's stupid mistakes and still lets the human drive. I'm sure this hybrid (which is the current industry) is safer than both your extremes