4 ms·

Correct, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.

by tw04 1y ago

fastball 1y ago
> the only true safe way An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.
- Dylan16807 1y ago
  Quote the rest of the line please.
  - fastball 1y ago
    "today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today. Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
    - alwa 1y ago
      I took "it" to imply "autonomous driving." But I very much agree this is extra silly.
    - Dylan16807 1y ago
      The person you replied to was talking about how we can achieve safe autonomous driving today. When I remind you of that context, that your rebuttal is not actually rebutting what they said, I am not performing No True Scotsman. The gap between humans and computers is enormous, not some weird gotcha tactic.
      - fastball 1y ago
        I literally rebutted that context. Waymos are not safe autonomous driving today, they have caused various safety issues in the era of "today". I didn't include "today" in my original comment because none of the available options are "the only true safe way to do it today", but I don't think it is constructive to just say that. No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        "Waymos are not safe" could be a rebuttal to what they said. "There are many safe humans" is not a rebuttal to what they said. Your comment above was the latter. > No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you. I'm unsure what they said that would qualify. Was it adding "true unsupervised"? I think that's a fair qualification, because most of the point of self driving is lost if I can't look away from the road.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
enigmoid 1y ago
More like $300k

Correct, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.

by tw04 1y ago

Correct, because that combined with about $30k in sensors is the only true safe way to do it today.

> the only true safe way An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.

Dylan16807 1y ago
Quote the rest of the line please.
- fastball 1y ago
  "today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today. Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
  - alwa 1y ago
    I took "it" to imply "autonomous driving." But I very much agree this is extra silly.
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    The person you replied to was talking about how we can achieve safe autonomous driving today. When I remind you of that context, that your rebuttal is not actually rebutting what they said, I am not performing No True Scotsman. The gap between humans and computers is enormous, not some weird gotcha tactic.
    - fastball 1y ago
      I literally rebutted that context. Waymos are not safe autonomous driving today, they have caused various safety issues in the era of "today". I didn't include "today" in my original comment because none of the available options are "the only true safe way to do it today", but I don't think it is constructive to just say that. No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        "Waymos are not safe" could be a rebuttal to what they said. "There are many safe humans" is not a rebuttal to what they said. Your comment above was the latter. > No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you. I'm unsure what they said that would qualify. Was it adding "true unsupervised"? I think that's a fair qualification, because most of the point of self driving is lost if I can't look away from the road.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]

enigmoid 1y ago

More like $300k