311–320 of 376 posts
There could definitely be a number of use-cases beyond taxis/individual cars. This is why top-tier regulations like this need to be broad. You can refine it at the vehicle category level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Doesn't the analogy fail given autonomous vehicles are eventually possible Only if there is a mathematical proof that eventually it will happen, someone might proof the reverse that current type of tech will never be good enough for general purpose driving and will work only in some specific conditions.
https://nitishpuri.github.io/posts/books/a-visual-proof-that... This is a rather intuitive mathematical proof that neural nets can emulate all functions in many dimensions. Knowing integrals (Calc 102) would help. With this information it’s either that self-driving is eventually possible or human brains are not mathematically representable (i.e. something akin to a soul). Meanwhile, the data collection/storage is get…
Yes, but the problem is we don't know what function we want to approximate. So it is like interpolation you give it some points and you get an approximation that is good enough around those points but probably very wrong if you are far away of the points.
We don't even know how many layers and neurons are needed so it seems to be a brute force approach, throw more data and more hardware and when stuff goes wrong maybe throw more data. But one day a Tesla might go on a different environment and maybe people have different hats and goes to shit because those hats were not in the training data, we don't have like in other sciences bounded errors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The answer is patches. The more complex and "smart" something gets the more patches you need. And since you dont want to go to the mechanic every time, firmware over the air it is. Maybe in your vehicle. But certainly never in mine. Any vehicle whose software can be remotely modified is one I'll never buy. As I said, that's a disaster waiting to happen.
A bug that affects your car that don’t get patched timely is also a disaster waiting to happen. Clearly it’s a risk model that you are willing to accept. I am not.
I think a lot of people are misreading this. Right now one of the rules to pass a crash test is that there is a steering wheel. This didn't used to be controversial, but now it is. The rules were written in the 70s and just assumed there would always be a drivers seat. The only thing here is that the government rewrote the rules to no longer assume those things. It's not saying those things aren't necessary, just not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do women specifically want steering wheels or something? I’m not sure I understand.
Women specifically do not want to be in cars which they cannot even theoretically control.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Turns off when I tell it to and does not disobey me" is part of "safe".
I've never seen a machine disobey the long-press, though it's probably happened before to someone. Anyway, I'd rather avoid accidents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do women specifically want steering wheels or something? I’m not sure I understand.
Women specifically do not want to be in cars which they cannot even theoretically control.
I suspect women have a greater relative comfort with automated vehicles versus those controlled by a stranger than men, though I’m not aware of any solid data for that (certainly haven't seen any for your claim, either.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Not accepting connections is not enough to be protected on the internet. Where is the requirement (or even a good reason) that a vehicle be connected to the internet ? Which is the same question to be asked about ovens, toilets and a raft of other stuff too. I'd say "none."
Clearly there is no requirement because plenty of cars don't connect to the internet. There are plenty of reasons. Whether or not they are good depends on your opinion, but for me at least good reasons include: * Triggering my home alarm if someone interferes with the car while it's parked in my driveway. * Remote tracking/disabling if stolen. Not actually that useful directly but if most cars have this then fewer pe…
My cell phone can do most of those things in my current car, and also has 0 ability to steer me off a cliff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It would be like saying today that you can't have a computer without an on/off switch because in the 70s every computer had a physical switch. As aside, that’d be great.
Think about having a switch on a laptop. And if the switch doesn't just kill power (which it shouldn't to safely shut down), then it shouldn't be a switch it might be better as a button.
P.S. Yer 'bout to miss your flight."
If your vehicle is heading relentlessly toward a group of schoolchildren it would be nice to have a way to override it. Either that or no windows so you won't be haunted by it every night of your life.
We have the technology to replace schoolchildren at a much lower cost than cars