Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop • Hacker News Board

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#191

Post by noodlesoups » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:05 AM UTC

zeta0134 wrote: post #92

robocat wrote: post #87

Are humans similarly vulnerable?

The thing humans have, that so far trained machine-learning models seem to lack, is a fairly reliable BS detector. I think the best example of this is an inkblot test. Sure I can look at an inkblot and see fanciful shapes, maybe a chair, maybe two rabbits kissing, whatever. But in the back of my mind, I also know perfectly well that I'm looking at an inkblot; I can entertain all the other classifications, but would n…

Context awareness is what one needs for sensing BS, a herculean task

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#192

Post by noodlesoups » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:09 AM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #43

smallstepforman wrote: post #35

There are many reasons why I dont believe in self driving cars, the first (and strongest) is to imagine that the software was written by my collegues (and myself).

I sort of find the idea of self-driving cars as ... selfish? Don't want to drive, take the bus. The idea that we all need our personal chariots (and now robotic chauffeurs) seems to me to be the height of irresponsibility. And, yes, I am guilty of owning a car myself and feel guilt about it. But for some reason the self-driving bit just seems to take it to another level for me. Maybe too there's an air of elitism abo…

>I sort of find the idea of self-driving cars as ... selfish?

Well we are selfish creatures. It makes perfect sense, what is the purpose of anything if not for you?

I don't think we'll be satisfied by nothing less than everything, and why should we?

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#193

Post by noodlesoups » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:12 AM UTC

InitialLastName wrote: post #95

gruez wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if self-driving cars were 10x safer than human-driven cars? Seems like your issue is with the personal vehicle bit, not the self driving bit. >Don't want to drive, take the bus. And what if my area has shitty bus service?

Make it better? Move to a better area? I strongly advise that anyone who pays attention to national politics diversify at least 50% of that energy into local issues.

Moving has a lot of inertia, and might not be possible if nobody is interesting in buying your house, or other area's rent is too high. Your area might have _had_ great service, but has rapidly degraded. There are tons of things outside your control. Having a car is the common answer to gain back some of that.

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#194

Post by goodcanadian » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:18 AM UTC

ip26 wrote: post #100

Ok, so can we agree to get rid of billboards?

Hawaii (among other places) has banned billboards. It is actually quite nice not to have annoying advertisements all over the place. So, it is possible, but it will take a concerted political push.

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#195

Post by MaxBarraclough » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:37 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #80

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trick is to construct a real looking advertisement that “accidentally” triggers this effect, and order the ad placed on digital billboards in Silicon Valley through a fake company located somewhere far far away.

There have already been (audio) ads that trigger speech-recognising machines like Alexa, and in that case I would very much say it is free speech.

Like the famous 2017 Burger King ad that deliberately hijacked nearby Google Home smart speakers. [0]

There's an argument to be made that it should be covered by cyber-attack laws. You aren't allowed to deliberately take control of someone else's computer without their permission.

Consider a hypothetical example: an author without use of their hands, who uses text-to-speech to write books and to control their computer. Imagine if they put you on speakerphone and you read out a sequence of commands to delete their work. That certainly wouldn't be covered under freedom of expression.

There's an obvious difference in degree, as spamming someone by hijacking their smart speaker isn't all that costly, but it's similar in category.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burger_King_advertising#2000s%...

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#196

Post by NiceWayToDoIT » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 9:40 AM UTC

Can this simply be prevented by sign edge detection? Are there standard traffic sign dimensions? If new Tesla can detect depth, then it should be possible to understand what is billboard and to ignore it. I do not know laws in America is it possible to display real traffic signs digitally in billboards?

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#197

Post by mamon » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 10:14 AM UTC

dheera wrote: post #50

JKCalhoun wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sort of find the idea of self-driving cars as ... selfish? Don't want to drive, take the bus. The idea that we all need our personal chariots (and now robotic chauffeurs) seems to me to be the height of irresponsibility. And, yes, I am guilty of owning a car myself and feel guilt about it. But for some reason the self-driving bit just seems to take it to another level for me. Maybe too there's an air of elitism abo…

Self-driving cars is not just about not wanting to drive. It's also about enabling Uber-style intelligent carpooling so that you can save energy while still maintaining similar times to driving, especially in places with poor or non-existent public transportation. It's also about reducing the number of cars in the world. You probably use your car for less than 5% of your life. Most of the time it just sits there taki…

>> Why do you need to own it?

Because our primitive brains instinctively want to own things. We can share with family, and with good friends, but not with strangers.

Another thing: car is used not only to drive, but also as a storage space for things that you want to have always with you: a bottle of water, duffel bag with gym clothes, umbrella, etc. With rented car pools you'd have to carry all that with you.

Also, society where no one owns a car or an apartment, where everything is rented, "pooled", would be a totalitarian dystopia - try to misbehave, post a negative comment about government on Facebook and you're banned from a car sharing service as a punishment. Seizing your property is of course also possible, but much harder.

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#198

Post by wazoox » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 10:24 AM UTC

My wife nearly had an accident because of a huge ad billboard that suddenly displayed huge roaring flames, to advertise for some steakhouse.

My general feeling is that these sort of intrusive, dangerous, anti-ecological (such a billboard consumes as much power as a family of 4), anti-social (one less worker to change billboards) ads should be banned, period.

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#199

Post by kalium-xyz » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 10:25 AM UTC

wazoox wrote: post #198

My wife nearly had an accident because of a huge ad billboard that suddenly displayed huge roaring flames, to advertise for some steakhouse. My general feeling is that these sort of intrusive, dangerous, anti-ecological (such a billboard consumes as much power as a family of 4), anti-social (one less worker to change billboards) ads should be banned, period.

What do you think about e-ink billboards?

Re: Hacked billboards make Teslas see phantom objects causing them to swerve or stop

#200

Post by a_bonobo » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 10:27 AM UTC

mattbee wrote: post #53

falcolas wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention, from TFA: "They're also so fleeting that they're difficult for the human eye to detect, and leave behind very little evidence." We've already got people who do things purely for the lulz (swatting, anybody) who could easily justify away these kinds of activities.

Both good points - so this kind of crime would likely be indistinguishable from a random, terrifying software failure, with the blame falling on the car maker.

Very often I see these tiny articles in local newspapers, 15 sentences, that go something like 'The driver lost control of their vehicle and died in the crash'.

I've had some terrifying software problems in Audis, including random shutdowns while driving due to faulty sensors, how often do you think someone who 'lost control of their car', which implies that there was human error, died because their car's electronics or software were faulty?

That number definitely is not zero.