7 ms·

And we trust that software can drive our cars for us?

Flammy 9y ago
Stock tracking websites don't need to be perfect, just need to be better than the humans they replaced. Faster, free, and less errors doesn't mean they must be error free. Self driving cars just need to be better than humans, and given the number of teens and senior citizens on the road...
- Nition 9y ago
  Statistically that's true but realistically I wouldn't want to use a self-driving car that's only a little better than the average driver. It's one thing to have a friend that's a bad driver and another thing to ride in their car.
  - jfoutz 9y ago
    But they are still on the road. They're still a hazard to everyone around them. Pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers are all at risk.
    - Nition 9y ago
      Yes but they'll continue to be on the road until they can get in a self-driving car that they can trust.
      - notahacker 9y ago
        Never mind trust: teens and seniors generally don't have the disposable income to spend on high end brand new cars (or expensive retrofits of sensor devices). The first buyers, apart from the wealthy, would be people and corporations that spend the most time on the road: generally tending towards being better than average drivers. And even if self-driving cars were exactly as good as the drivers they replaced, half the purpose of buying them is to spend more time on the road...
  - Tepix 9y ago
    Elon Musk said that he is aiming for his self-driving cars to be 10x safer than the average driver (without LIDAR btw).
- dogecoinbase 9y ago
  This is true from a pure-risk perspective, but I suspect we will find that humans are far more forgiving of the errors of other humans than they are of the errors (or worse, harm-minimizing calculations) of machines.
- ams6110 9y ago
  As someone contemplating the purchase of one, a self-driving car needs to be better than me. That's a higher bar than better than average even if it's not objectively correct.
  - krallja 9y ago
    This is only true if you are on an otherwise empty road.
  - tybit 9y ago
    On the other hand, as a passenger on public transport, taxis and ride shares it only has to be better than (often over worked and over tired) average human drivers.
  - stale2002 9y ago
    Do you ever use a taxi? Because if you do, you are putting your life into the hands of someone who could be a much worse driver than you. Instead of putting your life in the hands of a terrible taxi driver, would you put it in the hands of software that is on average better than a taxi driver? You are in a taxi, so you don't get to choose to drive it yourself.
    - goodplay 9y ago
      Not gp, but I would personally expect a taxi driver to be better than me seeing the amount of time the diver spends on the road. The driver wouldn't be profitable otherwise. That said, I also mirror gp in that any self-driving car must be at least better than myself for me to trust it. I imagine that's a sentiment shared by many people.
      - yellow_postit 9y ago
        I agree this is the natural bar, but don't know how to reconcile it with the average person believing they are a better driver than average (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority)
      - 9y ago
simonsarris 9y ago
We are all running software to drive our cars. Sometimes the software gets drunk, or has a stroke or a diabetic fit or just drops hot coffee all over the hardware.
ClassyJacket 9y ago
Yes. If this is indicative of the failure rate of computers in general, then cars will be PHENOMENALLY safe. Humans are doing a garbage job, killing people left and right. So what's your solution that isn't human or computer? I'd also hazard a guess that having humans update tens of thousands of stock prices every few seconds would result in more than one mistake in a decade.
stale2002 9y ago
Software ALREADY drives your car. You press the gas pedal, and a computer reads that signal and puts gas into the engine.
SmellyGeekBoy 9y ago
We trust software to fly our planes and run our nuclear power stations... So what's the problem?
- brohee 9y ago
  Those are simpler problems. There is more at stakes, but they don't have to contend with a kid running after a football.

Stock tracking websites don't need to be perfect, just need to be better than the humans they replaced. Faster, free, and less errors doesn't mean they must be error free. Self driving cars just need to be better than humans, and given the number of teens and senior citizens on the road...

Nition 9y ago
Statistically that's true but realistically I wouldn't want to use a self-driving car that's only a little better than the average driver. It's one thing to have a friend that's a bad driver and another thing to ride in their car.
- jfoutz 9y ago
  But they are still on the road. They're still a hazard to everyone around them. Pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers are all at risk.
  - Nition 9y ago
    Yes but they'll continue to be on the road until they can get in a self-driving car that they can trust.
    - notahacker 9y ago
      Never mind trust: teens and seniors generally don't have the disposable income to spend on high end brand new cars (or expensive retrofits of sensor devices). The first buyers, apart from the wealthy, would be people and corporations that spend the most time on the road: generally tending towards being better than average drivers. And even if self-driving cars were exactly as good as the drivers they replaced, half the purpose of buying them is to spend more time on the road...
- Tepix 9y ago
  Elon Musk said that he is aiming for his self-driving cars to be 10x safer than the average driver (without LIDAR btw).
dogecoinbase 9y ago
This is true from a pure-risk perspective, but I suspect we will find that humans are far more forgiving of the errors of other humans than they are of the errors (or worse, harm-minimizing calculations) of machines.
ams6110 9y ago
As someone contemplating the purchase of one, a self-driving car needs to be better than me. That's a higher bar than better than average even if it's not objectively correct.
- krallja 9y ago
  This is only true if you are on an otherwise empty road.
- tybit 9y ago
  On the other hand, as a passenger on public transport, taxis and ride shares it only has to be better than (often over worked and over tired) average human drivers.
- stale2002 9y ago
  Do you ever use a taxi? Because if you do, you are putting your life into the hands of someone who could be a much worse driver than you. Instead of putting your life in the hands of a terrible taxi driver, would you put it in the hands of software that is on average better than a taxi driver? You are in a taxi, so you don't get to choose to drive it yourself.
  - goodplay 9y ago
    Not gp, but I would personally expect a taxi driver to be better than me seeing the amount of time the diver spends on the road. The driver wouldn't be profitable otherwise. That said, I also mirror gp in that any self-driving car must be at least better than myself for me to trust it. I imagine that's a sentiment shared by many people.
    - yellow_postit 9y ago
      I agree this is the natural bar, but don't know how to reconcile it with the average person believing they are a better driver than average (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority)
    - 9y ago

simonsarris 9y ago

We are all running software to drive our cars. Sometimes the software gets drunk, or has a stroke or a diabetic fit or just drops hot coffee all over the hardware.

ClassyJacket 9y ago

Yes. If this is indicative of the failure rate of computers in general, then cars will be PHENOMENALLY safe. Humans are doing a garbage job, killing people left and right. So what's your solution that isn't human or computer? I'd also hazard a guess that having humans update tens of thousands of stock prices every few seconds would result in more than one mistake in a decade.

stale2002 9y ago

Software ALREADY drives your car. You press the gas pedal, and a computer reads that signal and puts gas into the engine.

SmellyGeekBoy 9y ago

We trust software to fly our planes and run our nuclear power stations... So what's the problem?

brohee 9y ago
Those are simpler problems. There is more at stakes, but they don't have to contend with a kid running after a football.