3 ms·

They're not contrived tests. They're attacks that work on specific NN-powered self-driving cars but don't work on humans. No human would be tricked into drivin

They're not contrived tests. They're attacks that work on specific NN-powered self-driving cars but don't work on humans. No human would be tricked into driving into oncoming traffic by the three small stickers in the road used in this attack.

jbob2000 8y ago
You've never seen a car that's accidentally driven into wet concrete/pavement? If a construction worker places the pylons a little too far apart, it looks like you might be able to use the lane!
- crooked-v 8y ago
  That's wildly different from having, as mentioned in the article, three white spots on the ground that are each a few inches across.
- SrslyJosh 8y ago
  Ah, the good ole "You can't make X perfectly safe, so therefore we shouldn't try to make it any safer than it is right now!" argument. A favorite of gun enthusiasts and gun lobbyists.
  - ben_w 8y ago
    A case in point about human perception: while you read jbob2000’s comment that way, I read that same comment as nothing more than a counter to the idea that humans were somehow invulnerable to errors. This seems a bit strange, given the main argument in favour of replacing human drivers with AI is that it should be possible to make one that works as well as the best human driver, only without getting tired, high, or distracted, and with reaction times measured in microseconds instead of hundreds of milliseconds. We’re not there yet. I don’t know how far we are from that future.
RandallBrown 8y ago
Sure they would. People ignore signs that say "Wet Cement" or blindly follow their GPS into a lake.
- nikofeyn 8y ago
  and since when is that considered okay?
kemitche 8y ago
And there are things you could do to roads that would get human drivers killed but not affect machine drivers. The world doesn't descend into chaos just because chaos is possible. It descends into chaos when the people who cause chaos aren't caught and brought to justice.

jbob2000 8y ago

You've never seen a car that's accidentally driven into wet concrete/pavement? If a construction worker places the pylons a little too far apart, it looks like you might be able to use the lane!

crooked-v 8y ago
That's wildly different from having, as mentioned in the article, three white spots on the ground that are each a few inches across.
SrslyJosh 8y ago
Ah, the good ole "You can't make X perfectly safe, so therefore we shouldn't try to make it any safer than it is right now!" argument. A favorite of gun enthusiasts and gun lobbyists.
- ben_w 8y ago
  A case in point about human perception: while you read jbob2000’s comment that way, I read that same comment as nothing more than a counter to the idea that humans were somehow invulnerable to errors. This seems a bit strange, given the main argument in favour of replacing human drivers with AI is that it should be possible to make one that works as well as the best human driver, only without getting tired, high, or distracted, and with reaction times measured in microseconds instead of hundreds of milliseconds. We’re not there yet. I don’t know how far we are from that future.

RandallBrown 8y ago

Sure they would. People ignore signs that say "Wet Cement" or blindly follow their GPS into a lake.

nikofeyn 8y ago
and since when is that considered okay?

kemitche 8y ago

And there are things you could do to roads that would get human drivers killed but not affect machine drivers. The world doesn't descend into chaos just because chaos is possible. It descends into chaos when the people who cause chaos aren't caught and brought to justice.