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

For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 190 posts

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#121

Post by jcranmer »

leesec wrote: post #91
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" It seems like authorities are struggling" I would rather describe it as sleeping at the wheel, passed out drunk and having pissed their pants after vomiting a bottle of hard liquir. Okay, maybe i got carried away with the metaphor, but you get the idea

It's funny how super pro regulation people never consider the lives lost caused by slow regulation. If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year. Since 2015 there have been 20 deaths in 16 accidents related to autopilot, globally. Doesn't sound like a lot in comparison to highway death numbers, over 6 years.

On a per-mile-driven basis, Tesla's self-driving accident rate is somewhere in the region of 5-10× that of human drivers, IIRC. And keep in mind that the self-driving here is already in a state of selection bias where it's more likely to be used in safer conditions (i.e., fully-grade-separated highway driving in clear conditions, rather than dense urban environments in inclement weather).

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#122

Post by jacobr1 »

croon wrote: post #73
3dfan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the time people are allowed to let their cars drive unsupervised, the crash rate of AI versus human will probably be 1:10 or so. So even when those cars ram into fire trucks from time to time, it would be better to let them do their thing. Otherwise people will grab the steering wheel, drive drunk, sleepy, angry etc and ram into all kinds of things again. Currently, there are 6 million car accidents per year in th…

In aggregate, humans have a lot of failure modes when driving, but it's also difficult to compare aggregate data with specific AI failure modes. I have been driving for almost two decades with 0 accidents. I'm not saying I can't have a lapse of judgement or do something stupid going forward, but I certainly won't mis-class an object, nor kill myself over it. I hypothetically want bad drivers to be replaced by AI beca…

I'm more interested in replacing _other_ drivers, more than myself. Really if we could replace the bottom 10% of drivers with AI, even at the level we have today, I imagine that would be a net improvement. But that isn't really a feasible program. As for future, improved AI, I would trade my own driving for the more efficient and safer system.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#123

Post by ClumsyPilot »

leesec wrote: post #91
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" It seems like authorities are struggling" I would rather describe it as sleeping at the wheel, passed out drunk and having pissed their pants after vomiting a bottle of hard liquir. Okay, maybe i got carried away with the metaphor, but you get the idea

It's funny how super pro regulation people never consider the lives lost caused by slow regulation. If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year. Since 2015 there have been 20 deaths in 16 accidents related to autopilot, globally. Doesn't sound like a lot in comparison to highway death numbers, over 6 years.

Are in favour of medical experiments on random strangers?

The same argument applies - sorry you died, but the data might save someone else's life down the line.

A lot of unique medical data was produced by Nazis doing cruel experiments on people.

https://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/learn-from-nazi-medical-res...

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#124

Post by ClumsyPilot »

BurningFrog wrote: post #103
leesec wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how super pro regulation people never consider the lives lost caused by slow regulation. If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year. Since 2015 there have been 20 deaths in 16 accidents related to autopilot, globally. Doesn't sound like a lot in comparison to highway death numbers, over 6 years.

If new technology X saves 100 lives for each person it kills, it will be banned. Because the dead person has a name, a tragic story, and grieving relatives, which will make the news. The 100 saved people are anonymous, don't know they were saved by X, and this will be unreported outside of obscure research journals.

If you save a child from drowning you don't get a 'a kill coupon' you can retrieve next time you are accused of murder.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#125

Post by seanp2k2 »

ChefboyOG wrote: post #93
gibsonf1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its all artificial but no Intelligence. Statistical pattern matching, no matter how sophisticated, does not understand "why" from conceptually thinking about a space/time model of the world as we humans do.

Even if this is the case, why does it matter? If the explicit goal is to create a human intellect, then sure, there's a really interesting conversation there—one that is happening constantly in the DL/AI research community, in which virtually no one believes that we're close to AGI or that current deep learning is going to achieve it. But that's explicitly not the goal that 99.9% of neural networks are designed with.…

While I agree that AI in current forms can be very useful, I believe that the problem of e.g. driverless taxis requires understanding of other humans and empathizing with their intentions to be truly viable. Driving is a social activity, and the current self-driving tech is about as convincing as trying to carry on a conversation with Alexa at a party. I do believe that we need AGI before self-driving will be more than a better cruise control.

I think the better cruise control is very useful and I love to see it, but Tesla’s marketing of it as “full self-driving” is disingenuous as best, and industry-chilling + deadly (as we’ve seen) at worst.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#126

Post by fksadfji12 »

amelius wrote: post #11

What will happen if a deep-learning bug is found in Tesla autopilot where it misclassifies a fire truck for a bridge? Will they ground all the Tesla cars remotely? Or disable autopilot remotely? Until they have gathered new training data and updated the software?

They have the ability to do so, if they want.

I don't think they will need to as those types of bugs are exceedingly rare.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#127

Post by skywhopper »

ChefboyOG wrote: post #93
gibsonf1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its all artificial but no Intelligence. Statistical pattern matching, no matter how sophisticated, does not understand "why" from conceptually thinking about a space/time model of the world as we humans do.

Even if this is the case, why does it matter? If the explicit goal is to create a human intellect, then sure, there's a really interesting conversation there—one that is happening constantly in the DL/AI research community, in which virtually no one believes that we're close to AGI or that current deep learning is going to achieve it. But that's explicitly not the goal that 99.9% of neural networks are designed with.…

The main problem is human overconfidence in the resulting functions, which are often measuring things humans didn't realize was embedded in the data (eg with tumor recognition), or are utterly hopeless at representing the infinite edge cases that the real world can present (eg self-driving cars).

It's one thing to have hoped that these methods could solve these problems when the improvements were coming rapidly, but there will always be a limit to how well these systems can perform. And the problem is that they fail in entirely non-intuitive ways, making human oversight to correct for errors very difficult or impossible as well.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#128

Post by Domenic_S »

jcranmer wrote: post #121
leesec wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how super pro regulation people never consider the lives lost caused by slow regulation. If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year. Since 2015 there have been 20 deaths in 16 accidents related to autopilot, globally. Doesn't sound like a lot in comparison to highway death numbers, over 6 years.

On a per-mile-driven basis, Tesla's self-driving accident rate is somewhere in the region of 5-10× that of human drivers, IIRC. And keep in mind that the self-driving here is already in a state of selection bias where it's more likely to be used in safer conditions (i.e., fully-grade-separated highway driving in clear conditions, rather than dense urban environments in inclement weather).

Maybe you were thinking the autopilot accident rate being 5-10x _less_ than human drivers?

> In the 2nd quarter, we recorded one crash for every 4.41 million miles driven in which drivers were using Autopilot technology (Autosteer and active safety features). For drivers who were not using Autopilot technology (no Autosteer and active safety features), we recorded one crash for every 1.2 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 484,000 miles.

Tesla publishes these safety reports; the accident rate has held fairly steady quarter over quarter: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#129

Post by Domenic_S »

jacobr1 wrote: post #122
croon wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In aggregate, humans have a lot of failure modes when driving, but it's also difficult to compare aggregate data with specific AI failure modes. I have been driving for almost two decades with 0 accidents. I'm not saying I can't have a lapse of judgement or do something stupid going forward, but I certainly won't mis-class an object, nor kill myself over it. I hypothetically want bad drivers to be replaced by AI beca…

I'm more interested in replacing _other_ drivers, more than myself. Really if we could replace the bottom 10% of drivers with AI, even at the level we have today, I imagine that would be a net improvement. But that isn't really a feasible program. As for future, improved AI, I would trade my own driving for the more efficient and safer system.

That's really the move, having another class of driver license that lets you manually drive. Anyone can get an in ai self-driving car, but if you want to manually drive you have to pass a difficult skills test to prove you could outperform the ai.

Re: For Tesla, Facebook and Others, AI’s Flaws Are Getting Harder to Ignore

#130

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

leesec wrote: post #91
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" It seems like authorities are struggling" I would rather describe it as sleeping at the wheel, passed out drunk and having pissed their pants after vomiting a bottle of hard liquir. Okay, maybe i got carried away with the metaphor, but you get the idea

It's funny how super pro regulation people never consider the lives lost caused by slow regulation. If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year. Since 2015 there have been 20 deaths in 16 accidents related to autopilot, globally. Doesn't sound like a lot in comparison to highway death numbers, over 6 years.

> If Tesla solves driving it will lead to tens of thousands of lives saved a year.

That’s a big if. If we solved aging, we’d save nearly all lives, so please don’t regulate my medical practice. I expect to have aging solved and millions of treatments rolled out by 2020.

Post reply on HN