3 ms·

Would you automatically assume Autopilot is not able to see and brake for the pedestrian at night and a human pair of eyes would see better? It’s unclear to me

Would you automatically assume Autopilot is not able to see and brake for the pedestrian at night and a human pair of eyes would see better? It’s unclear to me that will be the case. Either way that is a straw-man argument: even in manual driving you have to pay attention to surroundings but that comes at a much bigger cost of briefly letting go of what’s forward. Autopilot is an additional “pair of eyes” if you will and one more safety layer in that scenario (and one that is lower latency once it sees the pedestrian). Either one of you can brake and that might be an argument strongly in favor of such driver assistance systems.

spike021 5y ago
"Would you automatically assume Autopilot is able to see and brake for the pedestrian at night and a human pair of eyes wouldn't see better?" Honestly that's a terrible argument. We haven't reached any kind of semblance that Autopilot or similar systems are capable of that. Not only that, but it's meant as a supplement; it's not one or the other. We're simply not there yet, and may never be.
- mehrdada 5y ago
  > We haven't reached any kind of semblance that Autopilot or similar systems are capable of that. Oh, I was not suggesting that AP would more intelligent overall than humans, rather the vision stack might (or might not) be more sensitive to such pedestrian/background contrast at night than human eyes, simply due to the sensory differences.