3 ms·
The XKCD you linked is reasonable on the surface of it, but if you mull over it a bit more, you'll see the three glaring omissions: 1) people care much, much l
by dexen 7y ago
The XKCD you linked is reasonable on the surface of it, but if you mull over it a bit more, you'll see the three glaring omissions:
1) people care much, much less about "hurting" automated systems, and
2) people feel much less responsibility for accidents & failures if they are separated by a level of indirection of automation
3) people feel much less responsible for mass actions that affect anonymous people far away
Together, those three factors will indeed cause more incidents of people attempting to fool the self-driving cars. Especially if done by displaying malicious images via mass devices, like the light-up info boards, electronic billboards etc.. I don't expect much more actual accidents, tho.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- empath75 7y agoAlso, people aren't generally fooled by bad road lines.
- b_tterc_p 7y agoPerhaps not. And they certainly aren’t fooled by adversarial speed signs. But they are fooled by plenty of other things which are equally easy to implement and equally dangerous.
- b_tterc_p 7y agoWhile I don’t disagree with any of your points, there are still going to be people in cars, and any attempt to cause them to behave erratically could easily become attempted murder charges. I wouldn’t expect this to be any more common than people throwing rocks at cars on the highway.