3 ms·
You were there and I wasn’t. But from your description it just sounds like liability was the main topic of that conference. That’s not a group of people who are
by snowwrestler 5y ago
You were there and I wasn’t. But from your description it just sounds like liability was the main topic of that conference. That’s not a group of people who are going to be able to workshop technical solutions for one particular driving scenario.
In general I agree with your point that human drivers can create complex risks requiring sophisticated mitigations. But I also agree that ML systems are going to kill people at some point (arguably they already have) and policy will need to be created for that.
- rpaddock 5y agoIt was a mixed group from technical to non-tech, with the tech side best represented by Industry. The Government people were non-tech and I don't know about the military brass that was there. As far as I know there were no lawyers present. "liability was the main topic of that conference." More like underlying current of each session. It was not the intent of the conference.
- snowwrestler 5y agoThanks for clarifying
- sagarm 5y agoTesla has killed a half dozen of their customers, and it's been surprisingly not much of an issue.
- GekkePrutser 5y agoBut this is because their "full self driving" is anything but. They just blame it on the driver who should have been in control. With real full self driving where the driver is not supposed to have control, the legal situation will have to be decided indeed. I wonder if this is holding back progress there.