331–340 of 340 posts
I’ve taken downvotes from HN optimists for years about self driving cars. The slightest bit of criticism would have comments calling me an idiot 20 different ways. Then a single dead pedestrian changes all the news articles and the opinions change. We are a very, very long way away from self driving taxi cabs. What a total PR scam that was - but it did help valuations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that many times when the lines are invisible, new lanes form that are in a different location. So your map will not match up with what the rest of the traffic is doing.
I agree. I was just anticipating the common response to that challenge, or any other "static" perception challenge, which is "but there is a map"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does a human know it can't see well?
Well, that's a great question. It's also basically equivalent to the one that I asked. My point would be that I don't have an answer to that question, and given your response, I bet you don't either. Which leaves either of us at a loss when we try to create a safe and reliable autonomous vehicle. It's certainly not an unanswerable question. It's just quite hard to verify that they answer you have is a sufficiently co…
Why? It seems to me that estimating the confidence of a prediction by the quality of measurements is not an infrequent machine learning task. It'd be more complex for a driving algorithm than calculating the confidence interval of a linear regression, but it's in the same theme.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"people who seem to think that they are able to drive at full speed in the snow and complain about all of the 'out of town' drivers who slow down the roads because they 'don't know how to drive in the snow.'" The most raged filled responses I've even gotten to a comment on the Internet (20+ years) was when I called out aggressive snow drivers on Reddit. Despite being from, and living in the Northeast, the rage from f…
They're mad at you because it's indeed frustrating to get stuck behind someone who has no business trying to drive in the snow. If you get stuck because you're terrified at the thought of exceeding 10 MPH, they get stuck too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So road trips are unaccounted for? Not a comforting idea that taking your car to another area will render it functionally unsafe on the (differently designed) roadways.
That's a price I would very very happily pay for a self-driving car that works in my city. If I want to take a road trip, i'll rent a traditional car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does a human know it can't see well?
Well, that's a great question. It's also basically equivalent to the one that I asked. My point would be that I don't have an answer to that question, and given your response, I bet you don't either. Which leaves either of us at a loss when we try to create a safe and reliable autonomous vehicle. It's certainly not an unanswerable question. It's just quite hard to verify that they answer you have is a sufficiently co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, that's a great question. It's also basically equivalent to the one that I asked. My point would be that I don't have an answer to that question, and given your response, I bet you don't either. Which leaves either of us at a loss when we try to create a safe and reliable autonomous vehicle. It's certainly not an unanswerable question. It's just quite hard to verify that they answer you have is a sufficiently co…
> It's just quite hard to verify that they answer you have is a sufficiently correct one. Why? It seems to me that estimating the confidence of a prediction by the quality of measurements is not an infrequent machine learning task. It'd be more complex for a driving algorithm than calculating the confidence interval of a linear regression, but it's in the same theme.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's just quite hard to verify that they answer you have is a sufficiently correct one. Why? It seems to me that estimating the confidence of a prediction by the quality of measurements is not an infrequent machine learning task. It'd be more complex for a driving algorithm than calculating the confidence interval of a linear regression, but it's in the same theme.
A computer can predict with 100% confidence if you give it few enough measurements. That doesn't mean it will make the correct decisions. You have to already know you're measuring the right things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is a bit of a shame that a tech that could save a million lives a year globally won't be deployed because it can't be made perfectly safe This is a bit of a generous assumption. It very well could turn out that self-driving cars are worse, or no better, than human drivers.
> It very well could turn out that self-driving cars are worse, or no better, than human drivers. This is trivially true. I mean, self driving cars that are worse than human drivers already exist. Isn’t the point asking when they will be made widely available? I assume that is only possible when they are at least as good as human drivers by some key metrics.
However, I've noticed that many work from the premise that self-driving cars are already safer than human drivers. That, or they'll work from the premise that self-driving cars will definitely be safer than human drivers within a reasonable timespan.
Worse, some assume that self-driving cars will dramatically, or nearly eliminate automobile accidents/deaths, where any brief skim over workplace casualties involving autonomous machinery would put that fantasy to rest.
For a group of tech workers that often overlap with self-described skeptics, it's an interesting blindspot to have.