5 ms·

> I don’t think that’s true - but it certainly needs more than a couple of poor resolution cameras How would your imagined autopilot system handle traffic flag

> I don’t think that’s true - but it certainly needs more than a couple of poor resolution cameras How would your imagined autopilot system handle traffic flaggers, construction workers with signs, or various people directing traffic with handsignals? How will your system see the difference between a police officer making hand signs that you have to obey, and some random person making hand signals? How will it solve turn taking at stop signals, and how will it solve people waving you on, thereby changing the turn-taking order? There are tons of driving scenarios that require you to look at other humans, figure out who they are, and figure out what they want. For humans, this is dead simple. For computers... Nope.

Closi 5y ago
The answer is quite simple in all these cases - it doesn't. A self driving car shouldn't be operating on some mysterious black-box AI interpretation of the intention of (often ambiguous) hand signals from drivers and police officers. Any situation with hand-waving should be passed back to a human driver until the hand-waving can be eliminated with future laws and road rules. We aren't going to have full level-5 autonomy that's reliant on cameras interpreting people waggling their hands around. The solution is that you architect a full system to allow for self driving, which will inevitably include changing how people interact with cars.
- henrikschroder 5y ago
  Right, so you're saying that actual reality is too hard for self-driving systems to deal with, so we should change reality in order to coddle the self-driving cars so that they can handle it. ...which reinforces the point me and the grandparent post was making: You can't solve self-driving without AGI.
  - Closi 5y ago
    We change reality all the time to adapt to new technology - this is why we interacted with the first computers via punch cards rather than microphones and cameras. Were we coddling computers? Kind of, but solutions have to be a combination of what is possible. I guess there is a sliding scale with self driving cars: * Low technology, high societal or infrastructure change (for example we could build a totally different road network and dig cables into it, not practical but possible with technology 20 years ago!) * Medium technology, medium societal or infrastructure change. * High technology, low societal or infrastructure change. * Very high technology, no/little societal or infrastructure change (eg AGI that can interpret hand signals). All of these are possible versions of self driving cars - there is no “one” solution. Having AGI and going for the last bullet point isn’t the only option. As an example, when the 1950s imagined robotic vacuum cleaning they pictured a standing robot that would use your existing appliances - so they might have said “we need to work out how to pick up and use a household vaccum cleaner in order to make a useful household robot, which requires AGI!”. We now know that a better solution is the roomba, and AGI isn’t required. I personally think we will inevitably need some level of societal change, legislation change and possibly even infrastructure change to make self driving cars happen sooner.
grandmczeb 5y ago
Waymo claims to already be able to deal with things like hand signals[1]. Assuming that’s true, would that make you question whether AGI is required? [1] https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/waymo-self-driving-cars-police-officer-gestures/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/waymo-self-driving-cars-p...
tgaj 5y ago
It's not so hard. As human driver I ignore every hand waving if it's not from the guy in yellow vest who is standing on the middle of the road. I think computers can learn that too.
- bumby 5y ago
  This assumes the only legitimate case of a person directing traffic are people who planned to be in that position (cop, crossing guard, etc.) You need to handle the impromptu cases as well
  - henrikschroder 5y ago
    It also assumes people authorized to direct traffic always wears a yellow vest, and people not authorized to direct traffic would never... Also, it doesn't account for the fact that police officers can make hand signals from inside their vehicle (with or without yellow vests) that you have to obey as a driver.
bumby 5y ago
You touch on something very important in terms of confidence. People in this thread say there’s an unfair higher expectation for safety with autonomous cars. I think this is primarily because we can reasonably intuit what a human is thinking and will likely do. We can’t do that with AI so it’s reasonable to expect higher levels of starter before we fully trust them in the same way we’ve evolved to trust other humans.

Closi 5y ago

The answer is quite simple in all these cases - it doesn't. A self driving car shouldn't be operating on some mysterious black-box AI interpretation of the intention of (often ambiguous) hand signals from drivers and police officers. Any situation with hand-waving should be passed back to a human driver until the hand-waving can be eliminated with future laws and road rules. We aren't going to have full level-5 autonomy that's reliant on cameras interpreting people waggling their hands around. The solution is that you architect a full system to allow for self driving, which will inevitably include changing how people interact with cars.

henrikschroder 5y ago
Right, so you're saying that actual reality is too hard for self-driving systems to deal with, so we should change reality in order to coddle the self-driving cars so that they can handle it. ...which reinforces the point me and the grandparent post was making: You can't solve self-driving without AGI.
- Closi 5y ago
  We change reality all the time to adapt to new technology - this is why we interacted with the first computers via punch cards rather than microphones and cameras. Were we coddling computers? Kind of, but solutions have to be a combination of what is possible. I guess there is a sliding scale with self driving cars: * Low technology, high societal or infrastructure change (for example we could build a totally different road network and dig cables into it, not practical but possible with technology 20 years ago!) * Medium technology, medium societal or infrastructure change. * High technology, low societal or infrastructure change. * Very high technology, no/little societal or infrastructure change (eg AGI that can interpret hand signals). All of these are possible versions of self driving cars - there is no “one” solution. Having AGI and going for the last bullet point isn’t the only option. As an example, when the 1950s imagined robotic vacuum cleaning they pictured a standing robot that would use your existing appliances - so they might have said “we need to work out how to pick up and use a household vaccum cleaner in order to make a useful household robot, which requires AGI!”. We now know that a better solution is the roomba, and AGI isn’t required. I personally think we will inevitably need some level of societal change, legislation change and possibly even infrastructure change to make self driving cars happen sooner.

grandmczeb 5y ago

Waymo claims to already be able to deal with things like hand signals[1]. Assuming that’s true, would that make you question whether AGI is required? [1] https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/waymo-self-driving-cars-police-officer-gestures/ https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/waymo-self-driving-cars-p...

tgaj 5y ago

It's not so hard. As human driver I ignore every hand waving if it's not from the guy in yellow vest who is standing on the middle of the road. I think computers can learn that too.

bumby 5y ago
This assumes the only legitimate case of a person directing traffic are people who planned to be in that position (cop, crossing guard, etc.) You need to handle the impromptu cases as well
- henrikschroder 5y ago
  It also assumes people authorized to direct traffic always wears a yellow vest, and people not authorized to direct traffic would never... Also, it doesn't account for the fact that police officers can make hand signals from inside their vehicle (with or without yellow vests) that you have to obey as a driver.

bumby 5y ago

You touch on something very important in terms of confidence. People in this thread say there’s an unfair higher expectation for safety with autonomous cars. I think this is primarily because we can reasonably intuit what a human is thinking and will likely do. We can’t do that with AI so it’s reasonable to expect higher levels of starter before we fully trust them in the same way we’ve evolved to trust other humans.