4 ms·

Do you know how humans run stop lights and kill people, how does it compare?

by thewanderer1983 27d ago

grim_io 27d ago
We hold the driver accountable.
b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago
You're right, we should ban cars.
- maerF0x0 27d ago
  Their point, presumably, was that we shouldnt be anti-tech but we have to compare the statistics.
  - b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago
    Their point is whataboutism to somehow defend autonomous deaths as acceptable.
    - maerF0x0 27d ago
      I think, pragmatically, we have to accept that death is the outcome for us all, and trending towards fewer avoidable deaths and longer fuller lives is approximately the aim. Nonetheless deaths from a technology is inevitable. I believe what you're trying to talk about are excess deaths when a technology is less capable than the incumbent? I'm not sure the stats, but I'd suspect FSD is already superior to the often distracted, sometimes drunk, phone in hand driver that is the norm today. If chatgpt is to be trusted, Waymo and Tesla FSD are already massively safer than human drivers.
      - b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago
        [flagged]
      - maerF0x0 25d ago
        For the haters: https://spectrum.ieee.org/are-self-driving-cars-safe https://spectrum.ieee.org/are-self-driving-cars-safe
    - wat10000 27d ago
      It’s not whataboutism when you’re comparing the exact same actions and the two things can be substituted for each other. Whataboutism is “how dare you complain about our gulags when you treat your black people like slaves.” It is not “our system kills people but it kills fewer people than what we currently have.” Especially when killing people is a result of being on the bleeding edge of what’s possible rather than being a deliberate choice to hurt people.
    - mianos 27d ago
      It's not 'whataboutism'. It's an identical situation, and the statistics relate to the same events.
manquer 27d ago
Humans can go to prison [1], and depending on the state there are specific vehicular homicide laws or they are could be charged under normal homicide laws, specific statutes exist because vehicular laws can have higher punishment than typical negligence/reckless standards. In California the charge can be anything from vehicular manslaughter to second degree murder, that means 15 years-to-life without parole, depending on other factors such prior(murder) convictions or if the victim is a peace officer and so forth. In comparison self-driving systems do not have any punishment mechanism in the penal code. There is not even a well established liability standard, or ban/suspension threshold or any regulatory body equipped to audit a self driving system specifically [2] [1] if found guilty - we may disagree on the mechanisms, effectiveness ,conviction rate and other details, nonetheless there is enforcement and there are going people in prison for this type of crime everyday. [2] yes NTSB can do investigations but only for accidents (and give recommendations) and also has just 400 employees and $150M budget to cover everything from aviation to marine or pipeline and rail accidents.
- wat10000 27d ago
  Oh good. I may be put at unnecessary risk because people have higher standards for automation, but at least the guy who killed me will go to jail, maybe.
  - manquer 27d ago
    If safety is the objective we should be prioritizing public transit(automated even better) and not discussing agent/human driving a personal vehicle, here we value freedom[1] over safety, my comment is only a reflection of that ethos. [1]Whether we like it or not individual freedom reflects in everything from gun safety(unique in the developed world) to the state of public transport in the richest country in the world.
    - wat10000 27d ago
      We could do both. We can make cars safer and push on public transit.
- 27d ago
fbrncci 27d ago
At least we can hold them directly accountable by the law.
Footnote7341 27d ago
In many jurisdictions you can run people over and kill them and as long it was a normal lapse in judgement or mistake they cannot charge you. Only if you intentionally drive recklessly, for example speeding and racing, is it easy to charge a driver for manslaughter.

Do you know how humans run stop lights and kill people, how does it compare?

grim_io 27d ago

We hold the driver accountable.

b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago

You're right, we should ban cars.

maerF0x0 27d ago
Their point, presumably, was that we shouldnt be anti-tech but we have to compare the statistics.
- b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago
  Their point is whataboutism to somehow defend autonomous deaths as acceptable.
  - maerF0x0 27d ago
    I think, pragmatically, we have to accept that death is the outcome for us all, and trending towards fewer avoidable deaths and longer fuller lives is approximately the aim. Nonetheless deaths from a technology is inevitable. I believe what you're trying to talk about are excess deaths when a technology is less capable than the incumbent? I'm not sure the stats, but I'd suspect FSD is already superior to the often distracted, sometimes drunk, phone in hand driver that is the norm today. If chatgpt is to be trusted, Waymo and Tesla FSD are already massively safer than human drivers.
    - b40d-48b2-979e 27d ago
      [flagged]
    - maerF0x0 25d ago
      For the haters: https://spectrum.ieee.org/are-self-driving-cars-safe https://spectrum.ieee.org/are-self-driving-cars-safe
  - wat10000 27d ago
    It’s not whataboutism when you’re comparing the exact same actions and the two things can be substituted for each other. Whataboutism is “how dare you complain about our gulags when you treat your black people like slaves.” It is not “our system kills people but it kills fewer people than what we currently have.” Especially when killing people is a result of being on the bleeding edge of what’s possible rather than being a deliberate choice to hurt people.
  - mianos 27d ago
    It's not 'whataboutism'. It's an identical situation, and the statistics relate to the same events.

manquer 27d ago

Humans can go to prison [1], and depending on the state there are specific vehicular homicide laws or they are could be charged under normal homicide laws, specific statutes exist because vehicular laws can have higher punishment than typical negligence/reckless standards. In California the charge can be anything from vehicular manslaughter to second degree murder, that means 15 years-to-life without parole, depending on other factors such prior(murder) convictions or if the victim is a peace officer and so forth. In comparison self-driving systems do not have any punishment mechanism in the penal code. There is not even a well established liability standard, or ban/suspension threshold or any regulatory body equipped to audit a self driving system specifically [2] [1] if found guilty - we may disagree on the mechanisms, effectiveness ,conviction rate and other details, nonetheless there is enforcement and there are going people in prison for this type of crime everyday. [2] yes NTSB can do investigations but only for accidents (and give recommendations) and also has just 400 employees and $150M budget to cover everything from aviation to marine or pipeline and rail accidents.

wat10000 27d ago
Oh good. I may be put at unnecessary risk because people have higher standards for automation, but at least the guy who killed me will go to jail, maybe.
- manquer 27d ago
  If safety is the objective we should be prioritizing public transit(automated even better) and not discussing agent/human driving a personal vehicle, here we value freedom[1] over safety, my comment is only a reflection of that ethos. [1]Whether we like it or not individual freedom reflects in everything from gun safety(unique in the developed world) to the state of public transport in the richest country in the world.
  - wat10000 27d ago
    We could do both. We can make cars safer and push on public transit.
27d ago

fbrncci 27d ago

At least we can hold them directly accountable by the law.

Footnote7341 27d ago

In many jurisdictions you can run people over and kill them and as long it was a normal lapse in judgement or mistake they cannot charge you. Only if you intentionally drive recklessly, for example speeding and racing, is it easy to charge a driver for manslaughter.