4 ms·
Of course. But there obviously is a real issue with overhanging obstacles, since there have been multiple of these crashes now. Do we really accept a known fla
by mikepurvis 8y ago
Of course. But there obviously is a real issue with overhanging obstacles, since there have been multiple of these crashes now.
Do we really accept a known flaw just because it's still better than the alternative?
- esyir 8y agoHonestly? Yes. We take the best option available at current time, and simultaneously work on improvements.
- jakeogh 8y agoSo... human drivers.
- cjbprime 8y ago.. yes? I mean, it depends on what you mean by "accept", but yes we choose the option that has the least risk of killing people, even if it has "issues", because those issues are already encapsulated in the relative risk estimates. Airline flying is safer than driving even though planes have known issues too. Really struggling to find a logical point in here. Maybe some nuance I'm missing?
- mikepurvis 7y agoInteresting that you would bring up airplanes. Because when the Max 8 is suspected to have a systemic problem which may repeatably cause crashes, the entire worldwide fleet of them gets grounded. No one makes the argument that a Max 8 with a faulty AOA sensor is still safer than driving your car so whatever.
- taneq 8y ago> Do we really accept a known flaw just because it's still better than the alternative? Would you really choose an overall-worse alternative because the better option has a single known flaw? If you're that worried about Autopilot, just don't buy or use it. The rest of the car is still best in class. Edit: Be less inflammatory.
- sangnoir 8y agoAdding Lidar is an alternative - but Tesla/Musk keep ragging on it as their cars keep slamming into objects