3 ms·

Imagine if instead he had been using a car without autopilot and had killed himself and or others. That’s how these “falling asleep at the wheel” stories usuall

Imagine if instead he had been using a car without autopilot and had killed himself and or others. That’s how these “falling asleep at the wheel” stories usually go.

trgn 2y ago
This is both a very encouraging and very discouraging news story about AI.
BiteCode_dev 2y ago
That's assuming he would have fallen asleep without autopilot.
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Happens all the time, those split second sleeps that destroy peoples lives.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    He certainly could have, but he also might not have. If he was actively driving he may have remained more alert, or he may have chosen to pull over. It's a counterfactual so we don't really know for sure either way.
    - MyFedora 2y ago
      Yeah, sure. I guess you can say that a driver who hadn't slept the night before and was super stressed out about work could've fallen asleep while driving on a monotonous and boring highway, but he also might not have. Yet, at the end of the day, it's far more likely that he would've fallen asleep either way. I feel like this distracts from the fact that the self-driving feature was probably safer than falling asleep at a manual car for everyone involved.
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        In general, I think people are more likely to fall asleep when supervising an autonomous machine than when operating a manual machine. However falling asleep when operating any machine is obviously possible and it may that this driver was so tired that he would have slept in either scenario. We don't know.
zwirbl 2y ago
Imagine if instead the driver had to concentrate on something like, possibly, the road, and then not fall asleep of boredom. IMO this is one of the bigger issues with these kind of systems, they bore the driver while still forcing him to take the responsibility
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > Imagine if instead the driver had to concentrate on something like, possibly, the road, and then not fall asleep of boredom. In monotonous structures (e.g. long alleyways, long straight roads through nowhere) humans already have that problem - boredom tires them out.
- CoastalCoder 2y ago
  When I was in college, sometimes I foolishly drove between my parents' house and school when I was way too tired to drive. It's possible that the only reason I never crashed was pure luck. I only bring this up to say that needing to focus on the road might not be enough to keep a driver alert.
  - flemhans 2y ago
    You need to speed and flip off other drivers in order to get the adrenaline pumping. "Officer, it was for the best!"
alkonaut 2y ago
That's not an interesting story though. We always had tired/drunk/reckless drivers, and we accept having death and injury due to those. But we don't accept death/injury due to poor FSD, regardless of whether on average it is a better driver. There are several reasons for this a) self driving cars don't have a personal interest or "skin in the game" in avoiding accidents. Only business reasons are involved. b) It's new tech. We accept old risks, but not new ones. Just like we'd never accept the consumption of alcohol or tobacco if it was invented today, regardless of how dangerous they are compared to other substances. They are bad enough to be banned as new tech, no doubt. So self driving cars need to not only be safer than human drivers for acceptance, but significantly safer. They might be, and especially further into the future when the number of human drivers is smaller and there are good protocols for collaborating among self driving vehicles. But while they are the novelty the stories will look like this, and for good reason.
- CoastalCoder 2y ago
  > We always had tired/drunk/reckless drivers, and we accept having death and injury due to those FWIW, as an individual I don't accept those things. If I had my way, we'd have more effective solutions to those problems. But my views on the issue are apparently not widespread enough to change the status quo.
  - alkonaut 2y ago
    "Accept" was used in the loosest sense: We still drive, knowing that it can happen. We might petition for safer roads or stricter alcohol limits, but we don't suggest banning driving.

Imagine if instead he had been using a car without autopilot and had killed himself and or others. That’s how these “falling asleep at the wheel” stories usually go.

trgn 2y ago

This is both a very encouraging and very discouraging news story about AI.

BiteCode_dev 2y ago

That's assuming he would have fallen asleep without autopilot.

mensetmanusman 2y ago
Happens all the time, those split second sleeps that destroy peoples lives.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  He certainly could have, but he also might not have. If he was actively driving he may have remained more alert, or he may have chosen to pull over. It's a counterfactual so we don't really know for sure either way.
  - MyFedora 2y ago
    Yeah, sure. I guess you can say that a driver who hadn't slept the night before and was super stressed out about work could've fallen asleep while driving on a monotonous and boring highway, but he also might not have. Yet, at the end of the day, it's far more likely that he would've fallen asleep either way. I feel like this distracts from the fact that the self-driving feature was probably safer than falling asleep at a manual car for everyone involved.
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      In general, I think people are more likely to fall asleep when supervising an autonomous machine than when operating a manual machine. However falling asleep when operating any machine is obviously possible and it may that this driver was so tired that he would have slept in either scenario. We don't know.

zwirbl 2y ago

Imagine if instead the driver had to concentrate on something like, possibly, the road, and then not fall asleep of boredom. IMO this is one of the bigger issues with these kind of systems, they bore the driver while still forcing him to take the responsibility

mschuster91 2y ago
> Imagine if instead the driver had to concentrate on something like, possibly, the road, and then not fall asleep of boredom. In monotonous structures (e.g. long alleyways, long straight roads through nowhere) humans already have that problem - boredom tires them out.
CoastalCoder 2y ago
When I was in college, sometimes I foolishly drove between my parents' house and school when I was way too tired to drive. It's possible that the only reason I never crashed was pure luck. I only bring this up to say that needing to focus on the road might not be enough to keep a driver alert.
- flemhans 2y ago
  You need to speed and flip off other drivers in order to get the adrenaline pumping. "Officer, it was for the best!"

alkonaut 2y ago

That's not an interesting story though. We always had tired/drunk/reckless drivers, and we accept having death and injury due to those. But we don't accept death/injury due to poor FSD, regardless of whether on average it is a better driver. There are several reasons for this a) self driving cars don't have a personal interest or "skin in the game" in avoiding accidents. Only business reasons are involved. b) It's new tech. We accept old risks, but not new ones. Just like we'd never accept the consumption of alcohol or tobacco if it was invented today, regardless of how dangerous they are compared to other substances. They are bad enough to be banned as new tech, no doubt. So self driving cars need to not only be safer than human drivers for acceptance, but significantly safer. They might be, and especially further into the future when the number of human drivers is smaller and there are good protocols for collaborating among self driving vehicles. But while they are the novelty the stories will look like this, and for good reason.

CoastalCoder 2y ago
> We always had tired/drunk/reckless drivers, and we accept having death and injury due to those FWIW, as an individual I don't accept those things. If I had my way, we'd have more effective solutions to those problems. But my views on the issue are apparently not widespread enough to change the status quo.
- alkonaut 2y ago
  "Accept" was used in the loosest sense: We still drive, knowing that it can happen. We might petition for safer roads or stricter alcohol limits, but we don't suggest banning driving.