Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla AI Day [video]

livestream.tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 187 posts

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#21

Post by TheDong »

Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

> I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. [...] just hope nothing out of the ordinary will ever happen while we're in the car.

This honestly sounds pretty similar to the current state of affairs.

Currently, there are 0 people that fully understand the human brain. If you're driving, and someone turns in front of you suddenly, you can ask "why did they do that", but neither you nor anyone else can truly understand the set of inputs and thoughts that went into that decision at the time. Even if the other driver says "I guess I didn't see you", they also don't understand their own brain. It's probably a post-hoc rationalization.

The argument you have applies just as well to letting humans drive as letting opaque neural networks drive... better in fact since we have a better understanding of neural nets than we do of brains.

I think this is a fundamental problem with driving cars, and it's exactly this reason that I would rather take trains and subways exclusively than drive. Even if the operator's brain has a weird malfunction on a train, we have well understood systems (tracks) that prevent them from turning into traffic.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#22

Post by zizee »

BurningFrog wrote: post #19
Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

You're not wrong. But you can say the same things about a human driver.

And each human is unique, making it is really difficult to QA/monitor/rollout updates to the fleet.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#23

Post by ricardobeat »

Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

> We are being asked to close our eyes, take a leap of faith

Actually, you're being asked to "Always watch the road in front of you and be prepared to take corrective action at all times. Failure to do so can result in serious injury or death.", until FSD gets released :)

Do you trust cab drivers to "be trained on every edge case under the sun"? Self driving only needs to beat humans, who have some serious flaws, not achieve perfection.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#24

Post by bpodgursky »

gccs wrote: post #17
alain94040 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would QA solve that problem? As in, "we replayed 1.4 trillion accident scenarios and our AI behaved correctly on all of them". Safety in numbers.

"We trained a model, overfit on 1.4 trillion accident scenarios, and if behaved correctly on all of them."

Unless your model actually has trillions of parameters (and it doesn't, even gpt-3 only has 175 billion) it is not even possible to overfit on 1.4 trillion training inputs. You can't actually pigeonhole it.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#25

Post by Invictus0 »

alain94040 wrote: post #16
Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

Would QA solve that problem? As in, "we replayed 1.4 trillion accident scenarios and our AI behaved correctly on all of them". Safety in numbers.

It depends. How many of those scenarios were in fog conditions? How many where a spotlight suddenly blinds some of the cameras? How many where a power line is down, or a manhole cover is missing, or a barn owl/hippo/bear is in the road? If we estimate that it takes 10e5 to 10e6 incidents of a certain type to appropriately train the network for that situation... it's just too difficult. Reality contains infinite edge cases.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#26

Post by ajross »

Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

> At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them?

By external measurements and statistics. You measure an ML engine by performance. Literally no one anywhere knows how to debug these things by looking inside the model.

If it's a "fragile system" then it will be shown to be so in data. At the end of the data, either cars crash or they don't. It doesn't matter what kind neurons made the decisions.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#27

Post by Invictus0 »

ricardobeat wrote: post #23
Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

> We are being asked to close our eyes, take a leap of faith Actually, you're being asked to "Always watch the road in front of you and be prepared to take corrective action at all times. Failure to do so can result in serious injury or death.", until FSD gets released :) Do you trust cab drivers to "be trained on every edge case under the sun"? Self driving only needs to beat humans, who have some serious flaws, not…

How can you know that it beats humans? You would have to drive tens of trillions of miles to have any worthwhile data on this, all the while putting humans at risk.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#28

Post by 2bitencryption »

A big part of the presentation so far was an engineer describing the huge difficulty of stitching together the multiple cameras into one vector space that can be the input to the network, instead of treating each camera individually.

Seems like the biggest problem was each pixel from a camera does not tell you how far away it is, so even if you know the camera is X feet off the grounding pointing at Y degrees, you don't know if there's a wall in front of the camera or not. So you can easily reconstruct a 2D space from all the cameras just by knowing their positions, but you can't simply translate that back to 3D.

I could barely follow the solution to this problem, but it seems to approximate the distance somewhat okay... but it required yet another universe of features in the neural net pipeline just to achieve it.

The funniest part is... isn't this exactly what LIDAR is amazing at?? Or what about having each "camera" actually be two cameras that can achieve depth via parallax?

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#29

Post by ajross »

BurningFrog wrote: post #19
Invictus0 wrote: post #15

I like Andrej and I think he's a brilliant guy. At the end of the day though, there is no way for me or anyone to audit the neural networks or their training data. How can anyone trust them? I think this is really a fundamental problem with using neural networks in self-driving cars--I don't want to put my life in the hands of a fragile system that I, and no one alive, can understand. We are being asked to close our…

You're not wrong. But you can say the same things about a human driver.

Don't understand why people are downvoting this. This is the fundamental truth about safety automation like this. We don't need a perfect system to get huge gains here. Humans are really bad at driving, frankly. The bar here is very low.

Re: Tesla AI Day [video]

#30

Post by ModernMech »

2bitencryption wrote: post #28

A big part of the presentation so far was an engineer describing the huge difficulty of stitching together the multiple cameras into one vector space that can be the input to the network, instead of treating each camera individually. Seems like the biggest problem was each pixel from a camera does not tell you how far away it is, so even if you know the camera is X feet off the grounding pointing at Y degrees, you do…

Yes. This is exactly what LIDAR is for. This is the reason every single team in the 2007 DARPA Urban challenge that finished the race was equipped with a Velodyne laser. We knew it was a critical enabling technology 14 years ago, and it baffles me Tesla is eschewing it. Tesla's lack of this technology is the main reason I feel they will never achieve what they claim to without a huge breakthrough in AI.
Post reply on HN