501–510 of 581 posts
Just my opinion, but I don't think the local bay area ABC I-TEAM news can be trusted as a realiabe primary source. Seems like they are "cashing in" on a national story.
What has been unreliable about their reporting?
I want to ask: why is Tesla's advanced suite of cameras and ultrasonic sensors unable to detect a big, yellow and black stationary barrier? In combination with chevron markings that mean "never ever drive here". Either should be a globally overriding signal to emergency break or turn, not "keep following the white line". If the answer is "during morning light, it doesn't see it", then they need to take the feature of…
I've seen a lot of Tesla apologizers talk about how it's such a bad design, but people seem to be able to dodge it successfully and so should Autopilot. It seems like this feature should require hands on the wheel until it has enough training data that it doesn't do things like smash you into an obvious obstacle in whatever lighting conditions are possible at any time .
are they? so why was the barrier crushed in the first place before the crash? and why was it designed to be easily rebuild? its almost like someone knew people will have trouble and will eventually drive into it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 1. Ethical. One thing is that you do a stupid thing and die. Another is that a technology fails in trivial circumstances that in theory are avoidable. A doctor can make also errors, but a medical device is required to be very safe and reliable in what it does. This needs elaboration or citation. You're one of the only folks I've seen come straight out and make this point: that somehow a technology or practice that…
Ethics works by consensus. If the majority of the public become convinced that they prefer to die as a result of their choices than as a result of the choices of a machine they have no control over, even if the machine kills less often, then the machine is not an ethical choice anymore. Basically, forcing people to die in one specific way stinks to high heaven. As to why we use certain technologies, that is not so cl…
Then these people should stop trying to force me to accept a less safe method of transportation, by preventing me from using new technology!
Yeah, those people shouldn't be forced to use a self driving care. As they are ALREADY not being forced to do.
Nobody is being forced to use the technology. Just don't use it if you don't like it.
It is literally the opposite. These other people are forcing ME into a more dangerous situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I lived in California, I was shocked at how bad the roads are and how poor the signage was (since many of the signs get stolen and are not replaced for months or years). A moderate thunderstorm knocked out power in some parts of LA for weeks. It really seems like there are some parts of the government and utilities that are sclerotic.
Alameda St, just north of I10, is in such poor condition that it’s practically third-world. I’m usually so concerned with damage to my suspension that I avoid it. Los Angeles has a very interesting set of problems. Chief among them is the repercussions from closing roads/highways for repairs. It’s often times better, I think, to let them suffer in disrepair than it is to close them for any length of time. With semi-a…
I want to ask: why is Tesla's advanced suite of cameras and ultrasonic sensors unable to detect a big, yellow and black stationary barrier? In combination with chevron markings that mean "never ever drive here". Either should be a globally overriding signal to emergency break or turn, not "keep following the white line". If the answer is "during morning light, it doesn't see it", then they need to take the feature of…
>> I want to ask: why is Tesla's advanced suite of cameras and ultrasonic sensors unable to detect a big, yellow and black stationary barrier? The answer to that is that sensors detect, but don't make decisions. The decisions are made by the car AI that takes input from the censors and outputs control signals. So the pertinent answer is "why is Tesla's AI unable to make the decisions necessary to avoid a big, yellow…
What is the justification for allowing anything we don't understand to be on the road? I really want the NTSB to ask specifically what decisions the Tesla was making and not accept "black box learning" as an answer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> I want to ask: why is Tesla's advanced suite of cameras and ultrasonic sensors unable to detect a big, yellow and black stationary barrier? The answer to that is that sensors detect, but don't make decisions. The decisions are made by the car AI that takes input from the censors and outputs control signals. So the pertinent answer is "why is Tesla's AI unable to make the decisions necessary to avoid a big, yellow…
> Unfortunately, nobody can answer that, including Tesla engineers, because their cars' AI is trained with black-box machine learning algorithms that are extremely resistant to any attempt to understand how they make decisions. What is the justification for allowing anything we don't understand to be on the road? I really want the NTSB to ask specifically what decisions the Tesla was making and not accept "black box…
What's the justification for allowing human brains in the control loop?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately, nobody can answer that, including Tesla engineers, because their cars' AI is trained with black-box machine learning algorithms that are extremely resistant to any attempt to understand how they make decisions. What is the justification for allowing anything we don't understand to be on the road? I really want the NTSB to ask specifically what decisions the Tesla was making and not accept "black box…
> What is the justification for allowing anything we don't understand to be on the road? What's the justification for allowing human brains in the control loop?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tens of thousands of people are killed every year[1] in just the United States, humans are awful at driving. If autonomous vehicles are able to make driving as safe as flying it will be like curing breast cancer in terms of lives saved. [1] http://www.nsc.org/NewsDocuments/2017/Fatality-estimates-Jun...
There are hundreds of millions of people in the US. Most of them drive. Is a few tens of thousands fatalities that bad in an absolute sense?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. Tesla's self-driving vaporware being sold since Oct'16 is camera only and should be activated any day now ? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/823632597284691969 " Yes, safety should improve significantly due to autonomy features, even if reg…
>> They're not comparable at all. Google/Waymo uses lidar and has been at it since 2009 and per https://waymo.com/faq they are "fully automated vehicle" but alas not for sale yet. If it's already fully automated, then why is it not for sale, yet?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason why people buy expensive cars is because it is one of the ways in which they can quickly and quietly signal wealth or status. Cars are classicist, like it or not. After all, how much better can a $500K supercar be compared to a $50K car? Definitely not ten times better, the speed limits are the same, seating capacity is likely smaller, there may be a marginal improvement in acceleration and a corresponding…
>Cars are classicist, like it or not. as a trained classicist, I take exception to the idea a car could do what I do