3 ms·
Autonomous driving is still nowhere near 100%, so why suddenly jump to fighter jets? Is this more of Hegseth's foolhardy bluster and injected testosterone? The
by beloch 3mo ago
Autonomous driving is still nowhere near 100%, so why suddenly jump to fighter jets? Is this more of Hegseth's foolhardy bluster and injected testosterone? The tech isn't ready. They should start with golf-karts, not fighter planes.
-----------
Edit: Okay gang. If aircraft are easier to fly than cars are to drive, where are all your pilot licenses? If you've faced rush hour traffic, flying a military jet should be a breeze! Please, go volunteer your neighbourhoods to be the first for AI jets to be tested over. We can put a mock enemy target in an empty lot and watch them pick it off, first try, with zero collateral damage. Easy peasy!
- serf 3mo agoI reject the notion that planes are harder to automate.
- ge96 3mo agoPlanes might be easier, large empty space in the sky
- Lord-Jobo 3mo agoThere are many ways that flying is an easier solve than driving, believe it or not.
- syrrim 3mo agoFighter jets don't need 100%. In a war, we accept a much higher rate of casualties than we do in day to day driving. I would also imagine that while planes are harder for a person to pilot, they are easier for a computer. Most of what makes them hard is mechanical, not dealing with unexpected situations.
- budman1 3mo agoa strong reason to use a pilot is to protect a large capital investment. in war, you get shot at. things are over stressed, equipment fails. a pilot has the ability to improvise, and perhaps bring the aircraft back to be repaired and returned to service. will an AI be as good at 'improvising'?