Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
1–10 of 91 posts
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#2Award them a multi trillion dollar contract and replace all cars with their technology within the next year.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#3Look. It's generating bad press right now for your industry. I get that. I also think that in the long run your industry will be far safer than human drivers.
But now is not the time to post speculative bullshit like this. Would your car also have run into a school shooting unarmed?
You weren't in that situation, you don't know all the edge cases, the best you can say is that you had a similar situation under controlled circumstances and reacted appropriately.
This is publicly patting yourself on the back for a competitor killing someone. To say it's in bad taste is an understatement.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#4All these people and companies trying to profit from this accident is really poor taste.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#5Look. It's generating bad press right now for your industry. I get that. I also think that in the long run your industry will be far safer than human drivers. But now is not the time to post speculative bullshit like this. Would your car also have run into a school shooting unarmed? You weren't in that situation, you don't know all the edge cases, the best you can say is that you had a similar situation under control…
One fear is that Uber's mistakes will endanger the whole self-driving industry, by making people afraid. I'd say these companies are trying to separate themselves to avoid that.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#6This reminds me, does anybody know what's up with Geohotz's comma.ai?
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#7Look. It's generating bad press right now for your industry. I get that. I also think that in the long run your industry will be far safer than human drivers. But now is not the time to post speculative bullshit like this. Would your car also have run into a school shooting unarmed? You weren't in that situation, you don't know all the edge cases, the best you can say is that you had a similar situation under control…
One fear is that Uber's mistakes will endanger the whole self-driving industry, by making people afraid. I'd say these companies are trying to separate themselves to avoid that.
That doesn't make it the right time to publicly announce "we wouldn't have killed someone here, look how great we are".
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#8All these people and companies trying to profit from this accident is really poor taste.
This is not profiting, this is self preservation.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#9i get the feeling of some people here calling for bad taste, but mobileye ceo has been a long time proponent of playing it safe, underpromise, warning against the theoretical limits of modern technics, and has claimed for a very long time that fully autonomous driving wasn't doable in a near future ( proof of that in the numerous videos you can find on youtube).
i guess it's only fair for him to speak up one more time now that his fears has materialized.
Re: Mobileye says its software would have seen pedestrian in Uber fatality
#10Look. It's generating bad press right now for your industry. I get that. I also think that in the long run your industry will be far safer than human drivers. But now is not the time to post speculative bullshit like this. Would your car also have run into a school shooting unarmed? You weren't in that situation, you don't know all the edge cases, the best you can say is that you had a similar situation under control…
I agree. But suppose the difference mentioned (1 sec) is true. That's such a large difference that what they call for (formal outside verification) sounds pretty reasonable. This debate will always be hard since it will involve deaths, with AI and video involved.