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

A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

newsbeezer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 509 posts

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#461

Post by throwaway894345 »

nerdawson wrote: post #172
throwaway894345 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: is Tesla’s autopilot crashing more often or more severely than human drivers?

There was a post recently with a video of a Tesla attempting to drive into the path of an oncoming train: https://youtube.com/watch?v=yxX4tDkSc_g It’s not the big mistake at the end that stands out to me but the sheer volume of mistakes it makes along the way. Edging forward at an intersection when there’s a red light for example. I don’t doubt that self driving tech will improve and be a safer alternative to a human…

Yeah, I fully expect Autopilot to have different failure modes than human drivers, but what I’m interested in is the different fatality rates (deaths per hundred million miles, adjusted for different types of roads i.e., highway vs city streets). If Autopilot can save hundreds of lives annually to human-error mistakes like falling asleep at the wheel, etc but at the cost of one life annually due to obscure failure modes like driving toward a train, I maintain that we should not only allow Autopilot, but probably even mandate it on new vehicles. Sacrificing hundreds or thousands of lives annually because we don’t like the specific failure modes seems absurd. Of course, if it doesn’t save lives, then we should block its deployment on those grounds (but the particular kind of failure mode shouldn’t affect the calculus).

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#462

Post by anigbrowl »

agumonkey wrote: post #401
rafram wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed on that one.

Not exactly the same but there's the legendary McDonald's lawsuit after some customer burned his finger after dropping his coffee.

Legendary in the sense that you got all the details wrong. If you're answering someone saying 'citation needed' the least you can do is look up what you want to reference first so you can actually share useful information instead of multiplying confusion. If you can't remember or don't have time to look something up, you can just not reply.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#463

Post by cjohnson318 »

chrisweekly wrote: post #74
cjohnson318 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> industrial machinery that chops off hands In the US South there's a ton of poultry workers that have lost fingers and parts of hands to machinery. It's gotten a lot better lately, but for a long time it was a very bad problem. Since most of these workers were Black or from Latin America, there was very little was done to protect them.

"Since most of these workers were Black or from Latin America," more like, "Since most of these workers are poor,"

You're welcome to challenge the "it's not race, it's poverty" assertion anytime you want by hopping on a flight to Shreveport, Alexandria, or Opelousas, and just walking around. In places like that, where the population is about 50% black, and 50% of the population is under the poverty line, you'll notice that nearly 100% of the non-managerial people working at fast food places are non-white.

I don't know what the appropriate coin-flipping analogy is, but it's like getting heads a lot of times.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#464

Post by throwaways85989 »

Schiendelman wrote: post #164
thisishard wrote: post #154

I watched the video and the robot most certainly did not grab the boy's index finger. Sequence of events 1. The robot was capturing the boy's queen with a bishop. For that, it first removed the queen from the board. 2a. The robot next moved the bishop onto the square where the queen was previously located. 2b. At the same time, the boy prematurely moved his rook to the same square, he completed the move before the bi…

Right, this is why when we have robots that operate around humans we make sure they sense behaviors like that, and that they don’t use enough force to hurt humans.

Something like https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial... with adaptable force parameters should have been used.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#465

Post by numpad0 »

delusional wrote: post #335
drew-y wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume you are referring to driverless cars. Those aren't inherently unsafe. Neither are six axis robots. As I mentioned, cobots are well suited for this sort of situation. Just to reiterate, I am not trying to make some any sort of statement about the country. I'm just expressing my disgust in how this specific incident was responded to and the multiple failures in oversight leading up to it. Mistakes like this ha…

I'm genuinely curious, because I don't see it. What's the property that makes these robots "inherently unsafe" while driverless cars aren't?

I think it’s an inference from domain specific common sense in robotics.

“Inherently safe” is a technical term. It’s an ideal form that almost never materializes, so “functional safety” substitutes it and arguments are made as to what risks exists or how they should be mitigated.

“Inherently unsafe” as reverse of that means an object cannot be safe no matter what; A bomb next to a person can be an example. Had a driverless car inherently unsafe, it cannot be placed on public road.

The original argument therefor means, that it is established that cars and robots can be safe-fied with functional safety standards and measures such that only tolerable risks exist, so they cannot be inherently unsafe, so generally they can be let be on public roads or around people with conditions.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#466

Post by smsm42 »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #372
smsm42 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in illustration, I'll relay you an actual story that I read from one Russian blogger (who witnessed it himself and I trust him that he did): The scene is a couchette car in an overnight train between two Russian cities (a very popular mode of transport in Russia). It's late at night, so most people are preparing to sleep or sleeping already, so it is pretty quiet. Except for the two slightly drunk guys in one end…

> and I trust him that he did Trust him more. This anecdote is as old as couchette cars.

It probably happened many times in the past too. This culture is not new.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#467

Post by dmix »

UncleEntity wrote: post #162
dmix wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any other major examples of modern ML ethical issues besides some Tesla cars killing their drivers? Are ML driven robots in factories killing people or Something? Because I haven’t heard of anything else. The only other modern AI ethics stuff I hear about is making image generators more politically correct and maybe some criminal sentencing algorithms that are being misused (which isn’t really an AI ethics…

> Are ML driven robots in factories killing people or Something? Because I haven’t heard of anything else. All the videos on the YouTubes I’ve seen show industrial robots with crazy amounts of safety equipment where you can’t get close enough to it while it’s running for someone to get hurt. I have seen people experimenting with robot arms next to their CNC machine where it could easily take off someone’s head if you…

They are using ML algorithms on CNC machines and it’s causing AI ethical concerns?

Building experimental robotics on a production floor with workers walking around sounds like a normal safety issue not an AI one.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#468

Post by burnished »

carbadtraingood wrote: post #426
burnished wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I will tender my resignation whats with this attitude?

He's responsible for a gross oversight in safety that led to an injured child. There were obvious and simple safety precautions that were missed. This wasn't just, "whoops", this was fairly gross negligence.

Then you don't want a voluntary resignation, I think you want them ousted.

The kind of person to learn from their mistakes through honest self reflection (and hence would voluntarily resign) is probably the kind of person you might want to keep around, or at least not decide to make a public example of.

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#469

Post by dmix »

theshrike79 wrote: post #209
dmix wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any other major examples of modern ML ethical issues besides some Tesla cars killing their drivers? Are ML driven robots in factories killing people or Something? Because I haven’t heard of anything else. The only other modern AI ethics stuff I hear about is making image generators more politically correct and maybe some criminal sentencing algorithms that are being misused (which isn’t really an AI ethics…

Not AI directly, but there is a talk by a coder who was asked to do triangulation targeting for mobile phones. It was an interesting problem so he went for it. After a while he figured out that his code was used to target missiles on people using cell phones in Iraq.

Not any AI then?

Re: A chess robot in Moscow has broken the finger of its human opponent

#470

Post by justsomehnguy »

krisoft wrote: post #252
justsomehnguy wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then how about Germans? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTWM7LA540Y

That also looks supper sketchy and dangerous. Happy now?

If even one person would think about this situatioun without a prejudice? Yep.
Post reply on HN