7 ms·

Yup double yup ! > numerous lives it would save If you want to save lives, work on malnutrition, reducing coal energy, water access, basic vaccines, etc. You'

by wiz21c 6y ago

Yup double yup ! > numerous lives it would save If you want to save lives, work on malnutrition, reducing coal energy, water access, basic vaccines, etc. You'll have a much greater impact.

XorNot 6y ago
These are political problems, it's a different skillset.
logicchains 6y ago
Globally around 1.3 million people are killed in motor accidents yearly and tens of millions more are permanently disabled (https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index...). In comparison there are around 0.4 million malaria deaths annually (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria). So eliminating motor accidents would save around 3x more lives than curing malaria.
- bildung 6y ago
  This is indeed a problem, but Denmark's highways right now have 1/6 of the death rate of US highways, so if saving lives actually was the goal, AI isn't exactly the low hanging fruit.
  - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
    What’s the point of comparing the US to countries that are as populous as the DC metro area? There are so many factors at play the comparison is completely meaningless.
    - bildung 6y ago
      Death rate is calculated as deaths per billion miles driven, so I don't see how the respective populations matter here. One could make the argument that population density is important to consider, but in the US the less populated states have higher death rates IIRC.
      - jcims 6y ago
        Where are you getting those stats? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r... Denmark (like most countries) are definitely better at not getting killed on the road, but closer to a factor of two by miles driven and four per capita.
        bildung 6y ago
        From here (and my number was indeed wrong, its 1/5, not 1/6): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_States#United_States_compared_to_other_nations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...
      - martin8412 6y ago
        Don't worry about it to be honest. The guy is just giving the typical American response. Nothing that works in every single other country in the world could possibly work in the US due to their size. Nevermind the fact that it works in less or more populated countries. It just can't possibly work in the US. For other examples look at how the only way to deal with trash in New York is to throw it on the street or how California has huge forest fires almost every year due to powerlines falling.. If only there was a solution to those already solved problems
        LudwigNagasena 6y ago
        No, it is a typical response of a guy who spent two years and countless nights studying econometrics and the issues of specification and identification. But thank you for wrongly assuming my nationality and disregarding my response based on that.
      - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
        > I don't see how the respective populations matter here. They don’t matter per se. It is just a stat I had in my head that I could provide without googling anything to show how different both countries are. There are so many factors to consider with regards to driving infrastructure and habits, even density is not enough.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    I think it would be a lot easier to develop full self-driving than to get Americans to accept and implement the road safety measures that are in place in Denmark. And that's not even counting if there are cultural factors that make Danes better drivers other things being equal. I can't even imagine how many billions of dollars it would take.
    - piva00 6y ago
      So it's easier for us to teach a computer to think than to teach people to think and act differently? Not sure if I agree with that statement, they require very different solutions, one is technical and the other social. I don't think just because the social solution is hard that it makes the technical one easier...
      - jacobmischka 6y ago
        Maybe not objectively, but probably for some people. While some could be, many expert engineers wouldn't be expert social scientists or public servants.
      - boringg 6y ago
        Go look up changing to the metric system in the US. Failed effort billions of dollars. Definitely agree with the prior commentators statement. Technical solitarily already seems in the wild by enhancing driving capability...
      - bbarnett 6y ago
        Agree. I expect 2050, easily, before there's even the remotest hope of even parity with human drivers. I'm always astonished at how those most skilled at software, turn around and explain how software is better than humans at task $x. Yet, I've never used a piece of software without bugs. I've never seen a piece of software, not real world capable, which even remotely close to dealing with things, as well as humans. And the more complex the software, the more bugs. Bugs abound in complex software. Full self driving is as complex as the linux kernel, easily. How many bugs are in the Linux kernel? Right now? To even hope, even begin to hope that things will be mostly bug free, bug free beyond human "bugs" when driving, we'd: - Need to 100% freeze the platform, so the car has zero changes. Ever. Like a Volvo, 10+, 20+ years with only fixes for flaws. No change in drive train. No change in how the car handles, etc. - A 100% feature freeze fix for years and years, only bug fixes, no feature add. It's just not happening overnight. And when it does, cars are going to require an addition of massive sensors, it's not going to be camera or radar, it's going to be camera, radar, lidar, motion, wind, and 50 other environmental sensors. It's going to be mainine computing power in triplicate. Connectivity and sensors in triplicate. 100%, no way is the AI CPU even slightly network connected. No over-the-air updates. Bugs cannot happen. Bugs kill. Bad hardware kills. I do get that having a car self drive, in the desert, in constantly warm temp is an easy thing. Try it at -40C, in a snow storm, with a snow filled road, in the country with no ditches, no lines to see (due to snow), in the dark, when windy, periodic white-outs, and more. Heck, I'll say there's a chance when AI can drive on a frozen lake. And yes, humans do and can. So far, all AI driving is monoculture. Not to mention, how about a 20 year old car? Or even 10? "Buy new?" Now you hate the environment! And 20 year old cars are driven daily by humans, no they aren't the primary cause of accidents, because, when driving you notice issues in the feel of how the car drives. Can AI "feel" that? Sure! But that means loads and loads of sensors! And cost! ANd repair bills! To be honest, my 2050 thing is likely mostly due to this. Cost.
  - yarcob 6y ago
    When I was in Sweden on vacation, I was surprised that almost all except the most minor roads have a central divider. To allow overtaking, they have 2+1 lanes, and then after a few km they switch to 1+2 lanes (extra lane in the other direction). This eliminates the most deadly accidents (head on collisions) and makes overtaking completely stress free. It's a simple intervention that you can do almost anywhere, and it saves lives immediately. You only need to invest a bit in concrete barriers and paint. I wonder why almost no other country does that.
    - halikular 6y ago
      Sweden has the lowest traffic related deaths of any country [1]. There must be something to it, however it's strange how lackluster the government response was to covid in comparison. Edit: You think our covid restrictions was successful? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero#Outcomes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero#Outcomes
      - breakfastduck 6y ago
        I imagine you're getting the downvotes because the covid point isn't really relevant to the thread at all. They're talking about road layouts.
        halikular 6y ago
        I was making an off topic comment but it was related to the information I gave comparing the wide differences of effort and in turn success of these independent issues. Maybe they weren't interested in that.
      - sim_card_map 6y ago
        yes it was very successful: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525530/sweden-death-rate/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/525530/sweden-death-rate...
    - bratcomplex 6y ago
      they set standards for what a street, road, and highway are. and they do not mix them. As a result they are safer, cheaper, and land use has a higher tax revenue. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM
- FredPret 6y ago
  There’s also the time spent not driving. That counts as part of a life saved for every commuter
  - ploika 6y ago
    You could also achieve this with a bus.
    - wiz21c 6y ago
      Don't understand why you're being downvoted. Really dunno.
- h0l0cube 6y ago
  > So eliminating motor accidents would save around 3x more lives than curing malaria. Indeed, a worthwhile intervention. But when do you think Tesla will be auto-updating the FSD rickshaws in Liberia?
  - fastball 6y ago
    The faster it gets solved in the first market the faster it gets solved in the last, so the point stands.
    - h0l0cube 6y ago
      Not really. If you spend a dollar now on mosquito nets you might save a life. If you order a Tesla, you have yourself a fancy car that few people in the world can afford.
      - fastball 6y ago
        Not sure I follow.
        h0l0cube 6y ago
        You can execute a vastly cheaper intervention now, or you can speculate on something that helps in the future at some indeterminate time, probably decades away, that will always cost more.
        h0l0cube 6y ago
        And to make another point against FSD as a humanitarian intervention. Looking at the highest vehicle deaths per capita (or per no. of vehicles), it over represented by developing nations. What's common to them is poor infrastructure, unpaved roads, older vehicles with less safety features, lack of government enforced safety standards, lack of road rules and enforcement, etc. Worldwide road deaths will be more affected by regulatory interventions, capital spending, etc. FSD won't make a real dint in this number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
- exdsq 6y ago
  If we just look at deaths then sure, this could be right. However malaria is something we know how to tackle and isn’t that expensive. It’d be much more efficient to cure malaria than to eliminate all motor accidents.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Graffur 6y ago
How can we get jobs in these areas or do you mean to start businesses in these areas?
halfmatthalfcat 6y ago
I'm sure there will be a ton of residual effects from FSD. One off the top of my head being Emergency Services will be able to respond to emergencies faster because of minimized road congestion.
- scrose 6y ago
  History has shown that when you make driving easier, people drive more.
  - halfmatthalfcat 6y ago
    And? Does that matter if we have better capacity/congestion planning because all the cars are self driving. There's so much wasted time in traffic and excess congestion because humans are at the wheel creating chaotic traffic fluctuations by their driving.
    - scrose 6y ago
      Yes. That does matter, a lot. Look up induced demand. Also consider that full-self driving will likely mean more cars on the road that don't even have a person in them. Traffic backups and delays aren't just created from people crashing, it's because when you take a a dozen tiny humans and you put each of them in mostly > 15foot long cars, you now have 12 people managing to take up over 180 feet of space. Speeding up emergency services is a solved problem. You take a lane that is filled with single-occupant vehicles, and you dedicate that to efficient forms of transit, whether it be a high-speed bus lane or a bike lane. Emergency services will not only opt to use that the majority of the time, they will also be less likely to crash with another vehicle due to not needing to weave lane to lane. Hope this helps.

by wiz21c 6y ago

Yup double yup ! > numerous lives it would save If you want to save lives, work on malnutrition, reducing coal energy, water access, basic vaccines, etc. You'll have a much greater impact.

XorNot 6y ago

These are political problems, it's a different skillset.

logicchains 6y ago

Globally around 1.3 million people are killed in motor accidents yearly and tens of millions more are permanently disabled (https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index...). In comparison there are around 0.4 million malaria deaths annually (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria). So eliminating motor accidents would save around 3x more lives than curing malaria.

bildung 6y ago
This is indeed a problem, but Denmark's highways right now have 1/6 of the death rate of US highways, so if saving lives actually was the goal, AI isn't exactly the low hanging fruit.
- LudwigNagasena 6y ago
  What’s the point of comparing the US to countries that are as populous as the DC metro area? There are so many factors at play the comparison is completely meaningless.
  - bildung 6y ago
    Death rate is calculated as deaths per billion miles driven, so I don't see how the respective populations matter here. One could make the argument that population density is important to consider, but in the US the less populated states have higher death rates IIRC.
    - jcims 6y ago
      Where are you getting those stats? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r... Denmark (like most countries) are definitely better at not getting killed on the road, but closer to a factor of two by miles driven and four per capita.
      - bildung 6y ago
        From here (and my number was indeed wrong, its 1/5, not 1/6): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_States#United_States_compared_to_other_nations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...
    - martin8412 6y ago
      Don't worry about it to be honest. The guy is just giving the typical American response. Nothing that works in every single other country in the world could possibly work in the US due to their size. Nevermind the fact that it works in less or more populated countries. It just can't possibly work in the US. For other examples look at how the only way to deal with trash in New York is to throw it on the street or how California has huge forest fires almost every year due to powerlines falling.. If only there was a solution to those already solved problems
      - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
        No, it is a typical response of a guy who spent two years and countless nights studying econometrics and the issues of specification and identification. But thank you for wrongly assuming my nationality and disregarding my response based on that.
    - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
      > I don't see how the respective populations matter here. They don’t matter per se. It is just a stat I had in my head that I could provide without googling anything to show how different both countries are. There are so many factors to consider with regards to driving infrastructure and habits, even density is not enough.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  I think it would be a lot easier to develop full self-driving than to get Americans to accept and implement the road safety measures that are in place in Denmark. And that's not even counting if there are cultural factors that make Danes better drivers other things being equal. I can't even imagine how many billions of dollars it would take.
  - piva00 6y ago
    So it's easier for us to teach a computer to think than to teach people to think and act differently? Not sure if I agree with that statement, they require very different solutions, one is technical and the other social. I don't think just because the social solution is hard that it makes the technical one easier...
    - jacobmischka 6y ago
      Maybe not objectively, but probably for some people. While some could be, many expert engineers wouldn't be expert social scientists or public servants.
    - boringg 6y ago
      Go look up changing to the metric system in the US. Failed effort billions of dollars. Definitely agree with the prior commentators statement. Technical solitarily already seems in the wild by enhancing driving capability...
    - bbarnett 6y ago
      Agree. I expect 2050, easily, before there's even the remotest hope of even parity with human drivers. I'm always astonished at how those most skilled at software, turn around and explain how software is better than humans at task $x. Yet, I've never used a piece of software without bugs. I've never seen a piece of software, not real world capable, which even remotely close to dealing with things, as well as humans. And the more complex the software, the more bugs. Bugs abound in complex software. Full self driving is as complex as the linux kernel, easily. How many bugs are in the Linux kernel? Right now? To even hope, even begin to hope that things will be mostly bug free, bug free beyond human "bugs" when driving, we'd: - Need to 100% freeze the platform, so the car has zero changes. Ever. Like a Volvo, 10+, 20+ years with only fixes for flaws. No change in drive train. No change in how the car handles, etc. - A 100% feature freeze fix for years and years, only bug fixes, no feature add. It's just not happening overnight. And when it does, cars are going to require an addition of massive sensors, it's not going to be camera or radar, it's going to be camera, radar, lidar, motion, wind, and 50 other environmental sensors. It's going to be mainine computing power in triplicate. Connectivity and sensors in triplicate. 100%, no way is the AI CPU even slightly network connected. No over-the-air updates. Bugs cannot happen. Bugs kill. Bad hardware kills. I do get that having a car self drive, in the desert, in constantly warm temp is an easy thing. Try it at -40C, in a snow storm, with a snow filled road, in the country with no ditches, no lines to see (due to snow), in the dark, when windy, periodic white-outs, and more. Heck, I'll say there's a chance when AI can drive on a frozen lake. And yes, humans do and can. So far, all AI driving is monoculture. Not to mention, how about a 20 year old car? Or even 10? "Buy new?" Now you hate the environment! And 20 year old cars are driven daily by humans, no they aren't the primary cause of accidents, because, when driving you notice issues in the feel of how the car drives. Can AI "feel" that? Sure! But that means loads and loads of sensors! And cost! ANd repair bills! To be honest, my 2050 thing is likely mostly due to this. Cost.
- yarcob 6y ago
  When I was in Sweden on vacation, I was surprised that almost all except the most minor roads have a central divider. To allow overtaking, they have 2+1 lanes, and then after a few km they switch to 1+2 lanes (extra lane in the other direction). This eliminates the most deadly accidents (head on collisions) and makes overtaking completely stress free. It's a simple intervention that you can do almost anywhere, and it saves lives immediately. You only need to invest a bit in concrete barriers and paint. I wonder why almost no other country does that.
  - halikular 6y ago
    Sweden has the lowest traffic related deaths of any country [1]. There must be something to it, however it's strange how lackluster the government response was to covid in comparison. Edit: You think our covid restrictions was successful? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero#Outcomes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero#Outcomes
    - breakfastduck 6y ago
      I imagine you're getting the downvotes because the covid point isn't really relevant to the thread at all. They're talking about road layouts.
      - halikular 6y ago
        I was making an off topic comment but it was related to the information I gave comparing the wide differences of effort and in turn success of these independent issues. Maybe they weren't interested in that.
    - sim_card_map 6y ago
      yes it was very successful: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525530/sweden-death-rate/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/525530/sweden-death-rate...
  - bratcomplex 6y ago
    they set standards for what a street, road, and highway are. and they do not mix them. As a result they are safer, cheaper, and land use has a higher tax revenue. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM
FredPret 6y ago
There’s also the time spent not driving. That counts as part of a life saved for every commuter
- ploika 6y ago
  You could also achieve this with a bus.
  - wiz21c 6y ago
    Don't understand why you're being downvoted. Really dunno.
h0l0cube 6y ago
> So eliminating motor accidents would save around 3x more lives than curing malaria. Indeed, a worthwhile intervention. But when do you think Tesla will be auto-updating the FSD rickshaws in Liberia?
- fastball 6y ago
  The faster it gets solved in the first market the faster it gets solved in the last, so the point stands.
  - h0l0cube 6y ago
    Not really. If you spend a dollar now on mosquito nets you might save a life. If you order a Tesla, you have yourself a fancy car that few people in the world can afford.
    - fastball 6y ago
      Not sure I follow.
      - h0l0cube 6y ago
        You can execute a vastly cheaper intervention now, or you can speculate on something that helps in the future at some indeterminate time, probably decades away, that will always cost more.
        h0l0cube 6y ago
        And to make another point against FSD as a humanitarian intervention. Looking at the highest vehicle deaths per capita (or per no. of vehicles), it over represented by developing nations. What's common to them is poor infrastructure, unpaved roads, older vehicles with less safety features, lack of government enforced safety standards, lack of road rules and enforcement, etc. Worldwide road deaths will be more affected by regulatory interventions, capital spending, etc. FSD won't make a real dint in this number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
exdsq 6y ago
If we just look at deaths then sure, this could be right. However malaria is something we know how to tackle and isn’t that expensive. It’d be much more efficient to cure malaria than to eliminate all motor accidents.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Graffur 6y ago

How can we get jobs in these areas or do you mean to start businesses in these areas?

halfmatthalfcat 6y ago

I'm sure there will be a ton of residual effects from FSD. One off the top of my head being Emergency Services will be able to respond to emergencies faster because of minimized road congestion.

scrose 6y ago
History has shown that when you make driving easier, people drive more.
- halfmatthalfcat 6y ago
  And? Does that matter if we have better capacity/congestion planning because all the cars are self driving. There's so much wasted time in traffic and excess congestion because humans are at the wheel creating chaotic traffic fluctuations by their driving.
  - scrose 6y ago
    Yes. That does matter, a lot. Look up induced demand. Also consider that full-self driving will likely mean more cars on the road that don't even have a person in them. Traffic backups and delays aren't just created from people crashing, it's because when you take a a dozen tiny humans and you put each of them in mostly > 15foot long cars, you now have 12 people managing to take up over 180 feet of space. Speeding up emergency services is a solved problem. You take a lane that is filled with single-occupant vehicles, and you dedicate that to efficient forms of transit, whether it be a high-speed bus lane or a bike lane. Emergency services will not only opt to use that the majority of the time, they will also be less likely to crash with another vehicle due to not needing to weave lane to lane. Hope this helps.