10 ms·

So, for the sake of progress, we should let FSD also kill people because people die at the wheel anyway?

by ChuckNorris89 5y ago

CheezeIt 5y ago
Yes, exactly!
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  Even if it means that a loved one of yours would get run down by one of these, it's ok in the end, because it helped improve some billionaire's beta tech-demo?
  - yumraj 5y ago
    Chuck Norris should know better than to feed the trolls :)
    - 0des 5y ago
      I appreciate this playful response. Have a good rest of your weekend.
ajross 5y ago
How about we measure and see if FSD is killing people at all first? It's not an unanswerable problem, after all. There are 60k+ of these devices on the roads now. If the statistics say it's unsafe, pull it and shut the program down. Do they? If they don't, would you admit that it's probably a good thing to let it continue?
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  >How about we measure and see if FSD is killing people at all first? We just saw a FSD car run a red light and nearly hit pedestrians if the driver hadn't intervened.
  - ajross 5y ago
    Exactly. Let's measure. Is that rate higher than seen by median cars in the environment? I'd argue no, given how distressingly common that kind of incident is (certainly it's happened to me a bunch of times). But I'm willing to see data. I think where you're going here is toward an assertion that "any failure at all is unacceptable". And that seems innumerate to me. Cars fail. We're trying to replace a system here that is already fatally (literally!) flawed. The bar is very low.
    - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
      >I think where you're going here is toward an assertion that "any failure at all is unacceptable". We're trying to replace a system here that is already fatally (literally!) flawed. The bar is very low. Failure is not the issue when it comes to Tesla FSD, accountability is. For any mistakes human drivers makes, they have to pay up with money, have their license suspended, or with jail time, depending on the severity of their mistake. You fuck up, you pay the price. That's the contract under which human drivers are allowed on the road. Humans drivers are indeed flawed, but with our law and justice systems, we have accountability to keep those who break the law in check, while allowing freedom for those who respect it. It's one of the pillars of any civilized society. In my country, running a stop sign or a red light means you get your license suspended for a while. When a self driving Tesla does the same mistake, why doesn't Tesla's FSD AI have its "license" suspended as well? That's the issue.
- ablekh 5y ago
  You can't measure that without stopping all Beta testers' interventions, which implies allowing the system to actually kill people.
0des 5y ago
I take it you're the person who answers 'neither' when asked do you send the train left and kill 1 person vs sending it right and killing 100.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  What's the trolley problem have to do with this situation? Are there accidents where death is unavoidable? Yes, they happen every single day, but after the investigations and trials are over, the parties found responsible pay up for those deaths in either money or jail-time, or both. Does that mean we should we allow machines to make deadly mistakes, especially when death IS avoidable? Absolutely not. We sentence humans for such mistakes. Machines (either their operator or their manufacturer) should also have the same liability. Those are two different things which you're trying to spin into a strawman.
  - 0des 5y ago
    Even this response is 'neither' :) I love it. Have a good weekend Chuck /me roundhouse kicks out of the thread
  - Msw242 5y ago
    Right, this is closer to the following scenario: Let's say you are on an overpass above a train, and a very fat man is in front of you. The train, if it isn't stopped, will kill 10 people on the tracks. But, if you push the person in front of the train, it will kill 11 people, and one of those would be you committing homocide. What do you do?

So, for the sake of progress, we should let FSD also kill people because people die at the wheel anyway?

CheezeIt 5y ago

Yes, exactly!

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Even if it means that a loved one of yours would get run down by one of these, it's ok in the end, because it helped improve some billionaire's beta tech-demo?
- yumraj 5y ago
  Chuck Norris should know better than to feed the trolls :)
  - 0des 5y ago
    I appreciate this playful response. Have a good rest of your weekend.

ajross 5y ago

How about we measure and see if FSD is killing people at all first? It's not an unanswerable problem, after all. There are 60k+ of these devices on the roads now. If the statistics say it's unsafe, pull it and shut the program down. Do they? If they don't, would you admit that it's probably a good thing to let it continue?

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>How about we measure and see if FSD is killing people at all first? We just saw a FSD car run a red light and nearly hit pedestrians if the driver hadn't intervened.
- ajross 5y ago
  Exactly. Let's measure. Is that rate higher than seen by median cars in the environment? I'd argue no, given how distressingly common that kind of incident is (certainly it's happened to me a bunch of times). But I'm willing to see data. I think where you're going here is toward an assertion that "any failure at all is unacceptable". And that seems innumerate to me. Cars fail. We're trying to replace a system here that is already fatally (literally!) flawed. The bar is very low.
  - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
    >I think where you're going here is toward an assertion that "any failure at all is unacceptable". We're trying to replace a system here that is already fatally (literally!) flawed. The bar is very low. Failure is not the issue when it comes to Tesla FSD, accountability is. For any mistakes human drivers makes, they have to pay up with money, have their license suspended, or with jail time, depending on the severity of their mistake. You fuck up, you pay the price. That's the contract under which human drivers are allowed on the road. Humans drivers are indeed flawed, but with our law and justice systems, we have accountability to keep those who break the law in check, while allowing freedom for those who respect it. It's one of the pillars of any civilized society. In my country, running a stop sign or a red light means you get your license suspended for a while. When a self driving Tesla does the same mistake, why doesn't Tesla's FSD AI have its "license" suspended as well? That's the issue.
ablekh 5y ago
You can't measure that without stopping all Beta testers' interventions, which implies allowing the system to actually kill people.

0des 5y ago

I take it you're the person who answers 'neither' when asked do you send the train left and kill 1 person vs sending it right and killing 100.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
What's the trolley problem have to do with this situation? Are there accidents where death is unavoidable? Yes, they happen every single day, but after the investigations and trials are over, the parties found responsible pay up for those deaths in either money or jail-time, or both. Does that mean we should we allow machines to make deadly mistakes, especially when death IS avoidable? Absolutely not. We sentence humans for such mistakes. Machines (either their operator or their manufacturer) should also have the same liability. Those are two different things which you're trying to spin into a strawman.
- 0des 5y ago
  Even this response is 'neither' :) I love it. Have a good weekend Chuck /me roundhouse kicks out of the thread
- Msw242 5y ago
  Right, this is closer to the following scenario: Let's say you are on an overpass above a train, and a very fat man is in front of you. The train, if it isn't stopped, will kill 10 people on the tracks. But, if you push the person in front of the train, it will kill 11 people, and one of those would be you committing homocide. What do you do?