4 ms·
It just shows how out of touch with reality the "mainstream" media is. For years reputable publications like NYT, WSJ, The Atlantic, were heralding the arrival
by morpheos137 6y ago
It just shows how out of touch with reality the "mainstream" media is. For years reputable publications like NYT, WSJ, The Atlantic, were heralding the arrival of driverless cars. And yet there is really no engineering basis for them at present. Before we can have driverless cars we will need something akin to AGI.
- uniqueid 6y agoTo expect a majority of journalists to recognize this sort of hype is unreasonable. Most people here on HN (not I, to pat myself on the back) were equally, perhaps more, credulous about self-driving cars. If a tech forum like HN called it wrong, anyone could.
- redis_mlc 6y ago> To expect a majority of journalists to recognize this sort of hype is unreasonable. Give me a break. All the journalists had to do was watch the Google cars do the same circuits all day long in MV to realize they're just building a fake miles dataset for regulators. Probably the same with the other companies involved. Source: used to live on one circuit street off ECR. Saw up to 3 Google cars at a time behind each other, all day long.
- kanox 6y ago> Before we can have driverless cars we will need something akin to AGI. Not even close.
- Barrin92 6y agounless you torture the definition of self-driving vehicle to mean limited driving capability on highly altered 'smart streets' or whatever, yes it's absolutely true. As the article points out, ML is fundamentally way too brittle to deal with the long tail of issues that humans solve through common sense reasoning. We're like two or three paradigm shifts in AI away from having anything that solves open ended, problems in uncontrolled environments without glitching out like a Roomba.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]