3 ms·
There is absolutely a good reason for adaptove cruise control systems to ignore stationary objects: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-
by fallingknife 5y ago
There is absolutely a good reason for adaptove cruise control systems to ignore stationary objects: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-systems-sometimes-hit-parked-cars-and-lane-dividers/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-s...
- Filligree 5y agoIs the “good reason” here that they have insufficient sensors?
- Piskvorrr 5y agoWhich is...linking a Wikipedia article? Doesn't quite compute.
- fallingknife 5y agoWas a copy / paste failure. Meant to grab this link: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-systems-sometimes-hit-parked-cars-and-lane-dividers/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-s...
- Piskvorrr 5y agoIf you mean "the software is too stupid to be useful here, so let's ignore a whole class of issues, potentially with lethal consequences; abracadabra, it's SEP now", I agree. OTOH, this stretches the meaning of "good" a little bit. (thanks for the link correction)
- simion314 5y agoThe reason is "our code is too stupid, because is not an actual intelligence and better sensors are expensive"? This is a bad reason from my point of view. You claim that you have some super duper AI but it can't detect a truck or a wall from a shadow or bag , then your AI is stupid and buy some better sensors and improve your AI.
- fallingknife 5y ago> our code is too stupid, because is not an actual intelligence Well you don't ask for much
- fouc 5y agoMy takeaway from that article was that there's not enough trust in the raw inputs and possibly a missing continuous weighting system of the sensory interpretations. (humans do this naturally, weighing their various sensory interpretations in real-time simultaneously)