31–40 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They released inward-facing video of the safety driver shortly after the incident. The driver was staring at her phone in her lap with only occasional glances at the road every 5 seconds or so. I would call that pretty negligent.
That certainly doesn’t sound good. Is there footage of the driver at the time of the collision?
> AI is not preprogrammed to monitor a known input from a sensor to take a predefined action. I guess one of my outstanding questions, which reading this only confirmed, is why this is the case? I mean, humans are pretty good examples of intelligence. And yet we still have and use these anti-collision systems. Because, in the end, when wrong decisions are made these systems save lives. Why would AI-driven vehicles no…
Has anyone been able to even remotely explain why the LIDAR system wasn't going nuts? I saw the "it was dark" nonsense, but I assume this vehicle had laser and IR right? The camera footage was released, I'd like to see the lidar representation.
Has anyone been able to even remotely explain why the LIDAR system wasn't going nuts? I saw the "it was dark" nonsense, but I assume this vehicle had laser and IR right? The camera footage was released, I'd like to see the lidar representation.
LIDAR in this case is a rotating laser and while it scans, the vehicle moves (imagine moving a paper when a copier scans it). All processing is done later, first to construct an image and then to understand and use it. Part of why I wrote the piece was to explain how things can go wrong even if your LIDAR works fine.
I'd like to see a law that says: to obtain certification to operate a self-driving car on a roadway, an organization must agree to: 1) Conform to a standard set of protocols for how sensors provide data to a self-driving software system. 2) Log data in a form that could be submitted to any conforming self-driving software system, to obtain results from that system reporting what the system would do given these inputs…
Perhaps some sort of logging standard that is enforced across all systems? A black box of some sort?
If no one could prevent such a thing, this AI should never drive a car!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If it is not proven the driver was negligent why fire this individual? Presumably this individual has a lot of experience and domain knowledge in testing self driving cars so replacing them with someone else may not be an improvement. If they did make a mistake that got someone killed that could change things but I would hope we wait to find out if the driver was actually at fault.
They released inward-facing video of the safety driver shortly after the incident. The driver was staring at her phone in her lap with only occasional glances at the road every 5 seconds or so. I would call that pretty negligent.
Can't think it would help with driver's night vision.
> AI is not preprogrammed to monitor a known input from a sensor to take a predefined action. I guess one of my outstanding questions, which reading this only confirmed, is why this is the case? I mean, humans are pretty good examples of intelligence. And yet we still have and use these anti-collision systems. Because, in the end, when wrong decisions are made these systems save lives. Why would AI-driven vehicles no…
All I'm going to say is that I could tell this was a Medium post by the title...