5 ms·

> What I never understand is what happens when a new situation that the system did not previously train for happen? This happens to human drivers all the time,

> What I never understand is what happens when a new situation that the system did not previously train for happen? This happens to human drivers all the time, and humans are really bad drivers even in situations that have happened before. I fully expect AI drivers to be safer than human drivers.

tintor 6y ago
Human drivers can adapt to a new unseen before situation.
- lelandbatey 6y ago
  While potentially true, it's a trade off it seems proponents are willing to take. The same kind of trade off happens with other modes of transport with very rigid constraints on movement, things like trains. A train can keep going, stop, or maybe with enough time reverse if there's tons of time and a strong need. We don't stand around worrying saying "BUT WHAT IF SOMETHING'S ON THE TRACKS?!?", because the answer is "well then, the train will hit it. That's the tradeoff for being able to move freight so efficiently."
- reverend_gonzo 6y ago
  And software propagate learned knowledge perpetually, whereas each human has to learn it over and over again. On the other hand, software can make mistakes at scale whereas each human makes mistakes differently. It’s not so cut and dry.
- warent 6y ago
  I think what this boils down to is that the volume of vehicle-related injury/death will decrease, and the few remaining cases will be really strange and unlikely to have occurred with human drivers.
- jfoster 6y ago
  Sometimes they try to drive through floods. They also seem to randomly run red lights. Also, what's with the way they keep veering out of their lanes?
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Some human drivers can adapt to a new unseen before situation. Many can't in my experience.
dekhn 6y ago
One pedestrian death due to cars occurs on average every ~200 million car-driven miles. Is that really bad? (the math is based on # of US miles driven in 2017 divided by the number of car-caused pedestrian fatalities in the same year)
- lr4444lr 6y ago
  It's the loss of agency to machines, not the raw numbers that scares people. Why do you think so many people are unduly spooked after airline accidents due to mechanical or computer error?
  - waterhouse 6y ago
    I would say that, when I think about it occasionally, I am kind of scared by the possibility that someone will hack into all the self-driving machines (from a particular vendor) and make them all do something terrible at once—before anyone has time to deploy countermeasures.
    - contingencies 6y ago
      It went as an unspoken, unquestionable assumption that telephony was the right model for data networking. - Van Jacobson Maybe a single 'driver' agent in a free-moving ground vehicle in close proximity to vulnerable actors and objects is not the right model for scalable, efficient, safe personal transport?
  - colechristensen 6y ago
    It’s the fundamentally different kind of danger from machines. They make mistakes we can’t understand. I can understand a person being distracted, reacting slowly, not seeing me, etc. I can also mitigate this risk. Crossing the street I can make eye contact with a person and be really confident that they aren’t going to run me over. Walking in front of a robot? I have no internal model for the kind of mistakes they make. It seems equally likely in any circumstance that they’ll make the mistake of running me down, and there is nothing i can do to avoid it.
OpieCunningham 6y ago
I also expect AI drivers to be safer than human drivers ... in about 50 - 250 years.
SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago
> I fully expect AI drivers to be safer than human drivers. Don't you know the rules of AI claims? You always add "in 50 years" to every statement. The biggest problem is accountability: who pays when someone dies. Once that is worked out, it'll have a shot.
reader_mode 6y ago
Eventually sure - but in the start one road block I see is not just total numbers of accidents but also the way it fails. Human failure modes are relatively well known and we build our infrastructure around them - AI not so much.

tintor 6y ago

Human drivers can adapt to a new unseen before situation.

lelandbatey 6y ago
While potentially true, it's a trade off it seems proponents are willing to take. The same kind of trade off happens with other modes of transport with very rigid constraints on movement, things like trains. A train can keep going, stop, or maybe with enough time reverse if there's tons of time and a strong need. We don't stand around worrying saying "BUT WHAT IF SOMETHING'S ON THE TRACKS?!?", because the answer is "well then, the train will hit it. That's the tradeoff for being able to move freight so efficiently."
reverend_gonzo 6y ago
And software propagate learned knowledge perpetually, whereas each human has to learn it over and over again. On the other hand, software can make mistakes at scale whereas each human makes mistakes differently. It’s not so cut and dry.
warent 6y ago
I think what this boils down to is that the volume of vehicle-related injury/death will decrease, and the few remaining cases will be really strange and unlikely to have occurred with human drivers.
jfoster 6y ago
Sometimes they try to drive through floods. They also seem to randomly run red lights. Also, what's with the way they keep veering out of their lanes?
marcinzm 6y ago
Some human drivers can adapt to a new unseen before situation. Many can't in my experience.

dekhn 6y ago

One pedestrian death due to cars occurs on average every ~200 million car-driven miles. Is that really bad? (the math is based on # of US miles driven in 2017 divided by the number of car-caused pedestrian fatalities in the same year)

lr4444lr 6y ago
It's the loss of agency to machines, not the raw numbers that scares people. Why do you think so many people are unduly spooked after airline accidents due to mechanical or computer error?
- waterhouse 6y ago
  I would say that, when I think about it occasionally, I am kind of scared by the possibility that someone will hack into all the self-driving machines (from a particular vendor) and make them all do something terrible at once—before anyone has time to deploy countermeasures.
  - contingencies 6y ago
    It went as an unspoken, unquestionable assumption that telephony was the right model for data networking. - Van Jacobson Maybe a single 'driver' agent in a free-moving ground vehicle in close proximity to vulnerable actors and objects is not the right model for scalable, efficient, safe personal transport?
- colechristensen 6y ago
  It’s the fundamentally different kind of danger from machines. They make mistakes we can’t understand. I can understand a person being distracted, reacting slowly, not seeing me, etc. I can also mitigate this risk. Crossing the street I can make eye contact with a person and be really confident that they aren’t going to run me over. Walking in front of a robot? I have no internal model for the kind of mistakes they make. It seems equally likely in any circumstance that they’ll make the mistake of running me down, and there is nothing i can do to avoid it.

OpieCunningham 6y ago

I also expect AI drivers to be safer than human drivers ... in about 50 - 250 years.

SoSoRoCoCo 6y ago

> I fully expect AI drivers to be safer than human drivers. Don't you know the rules of AI claims? You always add "in 50 years" to every statement. The biggest problem is accountability: who pays when someone dies. Once that is worked out, it'll have a shot.

reader_mode 6y ago

Eventually sure - but in the start one road block I see is not just total numbers of accidents but also the way it fails. Human failure modes are relatively well known and we build our infrastructure around them - AI not so much.