4 ms·

They will evolve step by step just like everything does.

• rayiner 4y ago
  Or they’ll hit a wall short of their promises, like supersonic airplanes, nuclear, etc.
  • gregoriol 4y ago
    Nuclear works great actually
    • goodpoint 4y ago
      Not at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#/media/File:3-Learning-curves-for-electricity-prices.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#...
• spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Many things die off and cease to evolve.
• Fricken 4y ago
  Yeah, that's the problem. They're never gonna get there at that rate. >In the view of Levandowski and many of the brightest minds in AI, the underlying technology isn’t just a few years’ worth of refinements away from a resolution. Autonomous driving, they say, needs a fundamental breakthrough that allows computers to quickly use humanlike intuition rather than learning solely by rote. That is to say, Google engineers might spend the rest of their lives puttering around San Francisco and Phoenix without showing that their technology is safer than driving the old-fashioned way. The view that something fundamental is missing has been prevalent amongst Google's best self-driving engineers since sometime in 2015. Howver, at that time they still entertained optimism that the AI field was moving fast enough that the fundamental missing thing could be discovered. When ex-google self-driving project director Chris Urmson, Drew Bagnell and Sterling Anderson founded Aurora in 2017, they touted the mantra that "you can't build a ladder to the moon" Meaning, that, while self-driving industry can make continual incremental step-by-step progress with the technology they have, they will not within a reasonable time frame achieve their objective without a fundamental change.