5 ms·
I disagree with your initial sentiment. In my opinion, we can have self driving cars without a large human toll. I just think we need to stop trying to merge se
by osrec 9y ago
I disagree with your initial sentiment. In my opinion, we can have self driving cars without a large human toll. I just think we need to stop trying to merge self driving cars into a road system designed for human operators. Moreover, we should not be "beta testing" our self driving cars on roads with human operators. Accidents will happen, as ML models can and do go unstable from time to time. Instead, we should look to update our roads and infrastructure to be better suited to automated cars. Till then, I hope those martyred in the name of self driving technology are not near and dear to you (even if you'd feel it's worth it).
- tedivm 9y agoTo me beta testing should be a long period of time where the computer is running while humans are driving, with deviations between what the computer would do if it had control versus what the human actually does being recorded for future training. The value add is that the computer can still be used to alert to dangerous conditions, or potentially even overriding in certain circumstances (applying break when lidar sees an obstacle at night when the human driver didn't see it). The problem is that Uber needs self driving cars in order to make money, and Tesla firmly believes that their system is safer than human drivers by themselves (even if a few people who wouldn't have otherwise died do, others who might have died won't and they believe those numbers make it worth it).
- Splines 9y agoIt's surprising that this isn't the standard right now. I'm certain the people at Tesla/Uber/Waymo have considered this - I'm curious why this approach isn't more common.
- turtlebits 9y agoI'm sure it is the standard during testing. I doubt you can do this for the general population.
- kolinko 9y agoIt was happening. Many companies, Tesla including, gathered a lot of data for training the system. The problem is that you cna only learn so much without actual practice.
- kbutler 9y agoHow about all those martyred by prolonging our current manual driving system for the years band decades it will take to roll out separate infrastructure for vehicles no one owns because they can't drive them anywhere? I think we need to keep the human driver in control, but have the computers learning through that constant, immediate feedback. And get rid of misleading marketing and fatal user experience design errors.
- buvanshak 9y ago>but have the computers learning through that constant, immediate feedback. I don't know what is stopping them from simulating everything inside a computer. Record the input from all the sensors when a car equipped sensors is driven through real roads by a human driver. Replay the sensor input, with enough random variations and let the algorithms train on it. Continue adding to the library of sensor data by making the sensor car by driving it through more and more real life roads and in real life situations. Keep feeding the ever increasing library of sensor data to the algorithm, safely inside a computer.
- kolpa 9y ago>I don't know what is stopping them from simulating everything inside a computer. Obviously they've already tried that, and it doesn't work. The map is not the territory. In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
- buvanshak 9y agoNot following you here. What do you mean by "The map is not the territory.".. What I mean is that. Do not "teach" the thing in real time. Instead collect the sensor data from the cars a human is driving (and also collect the human input also), and train the thing on it, safely inside the lab. You say, they have done it already. But I am asking if they have done it enough. And if that is so, how come the accidents such as these are possible, when the situation is pretty out of a text book in basic driving?
- 9y ago