3 ms·
I don't think anyone is going to be dumb enough to try the specific scenario this article outlines. The real world is noisy, and in practice, an objective like
by mistercow 13y ago
I don't think anyone is going to be dumb enough to try the specific scenario this article outlines. The real world is noisy, and in practice, an objective like "reroute path to include Krispy Kreme, but only if it isn't too far out of the way" is going to have too many edge cases to do 100% reliably.
And it only takes one "my car made me 40 minutes late to work by trying to take me by a Krispy Kreme in the next town" story to turn this idea into a gigantic embarrassment for everyone involved.
- jiggy2011 13y agoUntil everyone shrugs it off and gets around it by holding their meetings at krispy kreme.
- scep12 13y ago> an objective like "reroute path to include Krispy Kreme, but only if it isn't too far out of the way" is going to have too many edge cases to do 100% reliably Too many edge cases? I'm sure you would have said the same thing about self-driving cars not too long ago. In a world where cars drive themselves, choosing an alternate route based on traffic and waypoints is a relatively easy problem to solve.
- mistercow 13y agoIt's a matter of risk vs. reward. The reward for self-driving cars is huge. If it screws up once or twice and makes you late, you don't have a whole lot to complain about. From the developer's point of view, it's not all that embarrassing because it's naturally framed in the context of "yeah, but it's a self-driving car." But the situation is totally different with advertising. It's not "I was late because my amazing scifi technology malfunctioned"; it's "I was late because of a crummy commercial". The consumer doesn't get any tangible reward for this, so they're just pissed off. And the developer and advertiser end up embarrassed because they did something shady and it screwed someone's day up.