3 ms·
I think that's the wrong conclusion from this story. The conclusion I draw is that some companies (and Tesla in particular) don't appreciate the "last mile" whe
by hiptobecubic 5y ago
I think that's the wrong conclusion from this story. The conclusion I draw is that some companies (and Tesla in particular) don't appreciate the "last mile" when trying to apply AI breakthroughs to consumer products.
"The plane lands safely 99% of the time" is an impressive demonstration and a completely worthless product, but if that's all you have then what can you do other than launch it?
- deltaonefour 5y agoExcept all self driving AI companies have failed to achieve reliable AI. Every single one. So it says something about AI more than companies.
- hiptobecubic 5y agoIt says that (driving) AI is a rapidly changing technology, pushed along by these companies. The definition of "reliable" here is also important. Usually this devolves into a series of moving goal posts ending with "if it can't do everything perfectly all the time then it's not real!"
- deltaonefour 5y agoIt's a fuzzy thing yes. But it is still clearly not safe to drive everywhere with AI. A claim was made by experts and leaders about AI how by now self driving cars would be ubiquitous. That claim was wrong. That does say something about AI. It is a counter claim against the initial claim.
- microtherion 5y agoThat's NOT a product you should be launching with planes and cars, considering what would be happening the other 1% of the time.