3 ms·

> It’s easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems

> It’s easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems. But eventually the self-driving wheel turns and we realize we don’t have as much command to reduce the whole complex world to a set of yes or no answers, let alone predictions, and our grossest capitalistic dreams are thwarted yet again, but not without a cost. If the argument is that when viewed through the lens of today's technology these are seemingly insurmountable problems, then it is a weak argument for the case that the self driving car will not arrive. It's easy to forget that what these cars can do today is leaps and bounds ahead of what self-driving technology could do a decade back. When these problems will be solved, it will be through other breakthroughs that we are not aware of today, so this is a premature obituary for self-driving AI.

AstralStorm 8y ago
This is presuming it is actually AI and not a bunch of very smart though not intelligent algorithms. (essentially an expert system for car driving) This is similar to how chess human players were soundly beaten using very unintelligent algorithms and learning algorithms are only more getting close with a lot of CPU/TPU effort... Car control, routing, computer vision and 3D vision enough for driving cars well are not in essence AI-complete problems. (compare to say making music, writing sensible text or learning complex games with hidden stage and deferred reward or exploring unknown situations)
- mchahn 8y ago
  > actually AI and not a bunch of very smart though not intelligent algorithms That is a relatively old philosophy question that won't be resolved any time soon.