4 ms·

Humans generalize what they learn extremely well. Humans also spent their whole life learning how to navigate their environment, and this is transferable to a r

• Arnt 5y ago
  Yes, that's what I think too. I just don't see a reason why driving skills should not be largely transferable. Being able to drive in California doesn't include all the skills needed for e.g. winter driving in Norway, or for driving in an Indian city, or (list goes on), but I fail to see that it's just 1% (as an upstream poster claimed) or even close to 1%. I fail to see that driving skills are 99% intransferable. I also fail to see that while the skills are transferable for humans, they are intransferable for computers. Various people in the thread assert so, but argument by repeated assertion is meh.
  • nextaccountic 5y ago
    > I also fail to see that while the skills are transferable for humans, they are intransferable for computers. Various people in the thread assert so, but argument by repeated assertion is meh. That they are nontransferable is the null hypothesis. I mean, we need evidence for this transfer. It's up for self-driving companies to produce this evidence. But they didn't, unfortunately.
    • Arnt 5y ago
      That they are nontransferable and 99 times as diffcult is not any kind of null hypothesis. That's just a nasty rhetorical trick: Take something reasonable, piggyback something ridiculous onto it, and argue that the reasonable thing is reasonable.
      • nextaccountic 5y ago
        I didn't say it's 99 times as difficult