3 ms·
I remember part of the report on the Uber that ran the person over was that the Uber’s classifier couldn’t figure out what a person with a bike in the road was,
by roughly 5y ago
I remember part of the report on the Uber that ran the person over was that the Uber’s classifier couldn’t figure out what a person with a bike in the road was, so it didn’t make it into the decision tree. I’m curious if that’s what happened here - Tesla never trained their cars to recognize airplanes, so it just didn’t “see” it.
- julianlam 5y agoSuppose we should just get ready for ReCAPTCHA challenges involving various parts of airplanes?
- roughly 5y agoThe ever relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1897/ https://xkcd.com/1897/
- badwolf 5y agoThe part that baffles me is that there isn't a "There's an object, not sure what it is, but there's something, I should stop/avoid it" instead it seems to be "I don't know what this object is. Oh well, it's probably fine to plow into it"
- giarc 5y agoI wonder if it couldn't "see" the jet since it has an all white underbelly and perhaps it blended into the sky or some hanger behind it.
- anikan_vader 5y agoThe Uber self-driving car was actually a Volvo -- its logs show that the Volvo emergency braking system had detected a pedestrian crossing almost 2 seconds before the collision. It would've initiated emergency braking, but Uber had disabled this feature, since, of course, they were testing their own shitty self-driving software. The Uber software chose to take no action, the Uber employee at the wheel was apparently paying no attention, and Uber had disabled the Volvo software, the only agent involved that actually thought it would be a good idea to pay attention and try not to kill a woman with a bike on a dark night. Uber shouldn't be allowed to test their software on public roads in my opinion.