3 ms·

Good point, the map is not the territory and the cars are engaging with the territory. Another interesting thing to consider, should there be widespread use of

Good point, the map is not the territory and the cars are engaging with the territory. Another interesting thing to consider, should there be widespread use of autonomous vehicles is the absolutely massive deployment of digital sensors that would entail, and who would use this data and to what ends? It would basically be realtime Streetview.

ghaff 9y ago
There's a fairly steady stream of posts here about data/privacy/etc. It's easy to pillory companies for violating privacy rules in various ways or mishandling data. However, given that data can't be reliably anonymized and that a lot of things that happen in public have simply never been systematically recorded in the past, there are a lot of fundamental questions over what sorts of data should be recorded when they provide legitimate value to users. As a hypothetical, what if autonomous driving is seen to depend on what many would see as invasive data collection and monitoring? Should it be permitted? That's a hypothetical, but I don't think there's an obvious answer to the question as posed.
- canoebuilder 9y ago
  If it's the type of autonomous cars that are prototyped today, they are definitely going to be dependent on invasive data collection. Does it get sent back to the mothership? How is it processed? Is it discarded? Who has access? When data is the new oil, these questions answer themselves if there is not legislation to prevent it. Such data would be hugely attractive for commercial interests. Hedge-funds and the like, use aerial imagery to get data like the amount of cars in parking lots at shopping areas. With a fleet of cars with 360 degree cameras driving around, not only could the number of people on the sidewalks be counted, but it would be technically possible to identify most of them.
- PeterisP 9y ago
  I feel that in the long run the answer is going to be heavily biased towards automated driving - unautomated driving kills. Every year more than a million of people worldwide die for no good reason, just because we suck as drivers; currently automated driving isn't yet superior, but in the long run it will clearly be so. I don't think that we'll ever justify that massive loss of privacy is more important than massive loss of life and health; especially if the bad consequences of loss of privacy is generally hypothetical and in the future; and the bad consequences of traffic accidents are obvious and immediate.

ghaff 9y ago

There's a fairly steady stream of posts here about data/privacy/etc. It's easy to pillory companies for violating privacy rules in various ways or mishandling data. However, given that data can't be reliably anonymized and that a lot of things that happen in public have simply never been systematically recorded in the past, there are a lot of fundamental questions over what sorts of data should be recorded when they provide legitimate value to users. As a hypothetical, what if autonomous driving is seen to depend on what many would see as invasive data collection and monitoring? Should it be permitted? That's a hypothetical, but I don't think there's an obvious answer to the question as posed.

canoebuilder 9y ago
If it's the type of autonomous cars that are prototyped today, they are definitely going to be dependent on invasive data collection. Does it get sent back to the mothership? How is it processed? Is it discarded? Who has access? When data is the new oil, these questions answer themselves if there is not legislation to prevent it. Such data would be hugely attractive for commercial interests. Hedge-funds and the like, use aerial imagery to get data like the amount of cars in parking lots at shopping areas. With a fleet of cars with 360 degree cameras driving around, not only could the number of people on the sidewalks be counted, but it would be technically possible to identify most of them.
PeterisP 9y ago
I feel that in the long run the answer is going to be heavily biased towards automated driving - unautomated driving kills. Every year more than a million of people worldwide die for no good reason, just because we suck as drivers; currently automated driving isn't yet superior, but in the long run it will clearly be so. I don't think that we'll ever justify that massive loss of privacy is more important than massive loss of life and health; especially if the bad consequences of loss of privacy is generally hypothetical and in the future; and the bad consequences of traffic accidents are obvious and immediate.