3 ms·

>evidence suggests that the bar is very low There is no real evidence (not biased or cherry picked) that replacing all drivers with Tesla's would actually be b

>evidence suggests that the bar is very low There is no real evidence (not biased or cherry picked) that replacing all drivers with Tesla's would actually be better/ I am aware of Tesla's numbers but those are invalid statistics , not comparing apples to apples. We would need something like how many miles does a car drive before a driver takes over, not comparing number of accidents since those are comparing human vs computer+human

cjbprime 3y ago
Why is it invalid to compare which of human vs. computer+human will save more lives?
- kube-system 3y ago
  It is inherently cherry picked data, because the computer can disengage at any moment, but the human cannot. For example: all of the worst driving conditions are inherently in the 'human drivers' bucket because the computer won't engage in those situations.
- bluGill 3y ago
  I don't drink alcohol at all. It is possible that because of that I'm better than computer+human while the humans overall are worse. I sometimes must drive on icy roads where the computer won't engage and all - these are more dangerous conditions and by refusing to do anything they ensure the computer does work. It is possible for humans to be better than computers+humans in all situations that computers work, but because of those situations where the computers don't work end up overall worse. The above are just two issues that I can think of, and I'm not even a researcher who would know all of those special cases. Which is why everyone wants transparent data: someone independent needs enough information to account for factors like the above and allow us to have a real debate.
- simion314 3y ago
  >Why is it invalid to compare which of human vs. computer+human will save more lives? I think it is not relevant for real self driving. I can "invent" also a computer that will not let drunk people start the car, it will have good statistics, the issue I am not a bilionaire to get people install my invention in their cars. if we the society want to reduce the deaths we could have already done a lot more for preventing drunk drivers, bad drivers, speeding etc.

cjbprime 3y ago

Why is it invalid to compare which of human vs. computer+human will save more lives?

kube-system 3y ago
It is inherently cherry picked data, because the computer can disengage at any moment, but the human cannot. For example: all of the worst driving conditions are inherently in the 'human drivers' bucket because the computer won't engage in those situations.
bluGill 3y ago
I don't drink alcohol at all. It is possible that because of that I'm better than computer+human while the humans overall are worse. I sometimes must drive on icy roads where the computer won't engage and all - these are more dangerous conditions and by refusing to do anything they ensure the computer does work. It is possible for humans to be better than computers+humans in all situations that computers work, but because of those situations where the computers don't work end up overall worse. The above are just two issues that I can think of, and I'm not even a researcher who would know all of those special cases. Which is why everyone wants transparent data: someone independent needs enough information to account for factors like the above and allow us to have a real debate.
simion314 3y ago
>Why is it invalid to compare which of human vs. computer+human will save more lives? I think it is not relevant for real self driving. I can "invent" also a computer that will not let drunk people start the car, it will have good statistics, the issue I am not a bilionaire to get people install my invention in their cars. if we the society want to reduce the deaths we could have already done a lot more for preventing drunk drivers, bad drivers, speeding etc.