6 ms·
What's this do for your willingness to use a driverless car? My outsider's impression is similar to your insiders - the complexity of external systems is catch
by mathattack 13y ago
What's this do for your willingness to use a driverless car?
My outsider's impression is similar to your insiders - the complexity of external systems is catching up with embedded systems, but perhaps not the practices and talent.
- derefr 13y agoI would trust car firmware written (entirely) by Google. They're a software company, after all.
- mathattack 13y agoThey're also a SW firm that seems to know how to manage complexity. There's a lot of software firms that I still wouldn't trust. :-)
- WalterBright 13y agoGoogle has never written software before that causes people to die if it fails. It's a very different thing from other kinds of software that you just reboot if it is acting funny.
- gaius 13y agoUmm, you can A/B test a new logo or colour scheme. You can't A/B test a collision avoidance algorithm. What makes Google a successful ad platform doesn't translate to making them a good safety-critical engineering company.
- gknoy 13y agoI imagine you could, it just would be expensive, and owuld not involve the customers at large.
- vonmoltke 13y agoThat is exactly I would not trust firmware written primarily or entirely by Google. For all the talk of clueless EEs writing code in this thread, I have horror stories of clueless SEs messing with hardware.
- swalsh 13y agoTo be fair, there's bugs in humans too. Chances are (especially over time) the bugs in a computer will be worked out to the point that they are rarer then the ones in humans.
- mathattack 13y agoYes - the continuous improvement cycle is much faster on machines!
- unsignedint 13y agoAt least, there would be no wondering who (human vs. computer) has been at fault if it was driverless.