3 ms·
Yes, except this presumes that AI would recognize the kid at the same time as a human driver. Or at least soon enough such that AI's quicker reflexes can compen
by beerandt 7y ago
Yes, except this presumes that AI would recognize the kid at the same time as a human driver. Or at least soon enough such that AI's quicker reflexes can compensate for any delay.
If AI can't recognize some obstacles at all, then I think it's safe to assume there may be some delay in obstacle recognition compared to humans.
- jonplackett 7y agoYou’re probably right. The point I’m making though is there’s going to be some things AI is better at and some things humans are better at and it’s going to be much harder to accept dead people between those points.
- beerandt 7y agoI agree. I just don't get why: 1) Everyone assumes the good will outweigh the bad. (And why proof of humans doing one task better than AI is somehow also taken as self-evident proof that the AI will be better at everything else.) 2) No one assumes that we, as humans, will ever be able to improve our driving skills in way that can keep up with AI advances. Someone could invent a magic driving pill. Which is crazy. I just don't assume that it's any crazier than a near-perfect driving AI.