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

51–60 of 190 posts

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

#51

Post by username_my1 »

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?

The idea is to have self driving safer than our average driver who’s always texting and driving, sometimes driving under the influence and sometimes just too stressed to pay attention to the road.

Self driving cars will make fatal mistakes but I have no doubt that tesla very soon will be able to be safer than the average driver.

Plus the more autonomous vehicles on the road the more safer it is.

Finally currently traffic accidents are the leading cause of death for 30yo so we aren’t exactly replacing a perfect system

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

#52

Post by mplewis »

username_my1 wrote: post #51
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?

The idea is to have self driving safer than our average driver who’s always texting and driving, sometimes driving under the influence and sometimes just too stressed to pay attention to the road. Self driving cars will make fatal mistakes but I have no doubt that tesla very soon will be able to be safer than the average driver. Plus the more autonomous vehicles on the road the more safer it is. Finally currently tra…

Ok. But this idealism doesn’t work when Tesla has clear failure modes that simply shouldn’t happen during normal driving.

Humans generally do not give their cars haircuts by slamming them under a stopped cargo truck. They do not generally smash straight into stationary emergency vehicles.

We can’t handwave basic safety issues away by saying “in aggregate, they perform better than humans in most conditions.” The basic safety issues get people killed. Leaning on some “average driver” fallacy is a way to ignore issues core to the tech stack.

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

#53

Post by mplewis »

Forge36 wrote: post #47
machinelearning wrote: post #37

Question for people here: Is it justifiable to accept these flaws in the short-term if it results in a car that has a lower-error rate than human drivers in the medium/long-term?

It's about risk trade off. If it's 2x better than humans is it worth it? 10x? 100x? 36,096 deaths in 2019 in U.S. ~1.3 million worldwide (I couldn't find injury statistics this morning) If the flaw is found before someone dies from it I'm not concerned. If 1 person dies instead of 10 I'm all for it. (I'd take 2x better than humans any day)

We can’t ignore core usability and basic safety issues by saying “on average, this is better.” End users can’t be expected to know that they’ll probably be fine, but an edge case they don’t understand will kill them one evening when they drive past a stopped ambulance.

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

#55

Post by spywaregorilla »

mplewis wrote: post #52
username_my1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is to have self driving safer than our average driver who’s always texting and driving, sometimes driving under the influence and sometimes just too stressed to pay attention to the road. Self driving cars will make fatal mistakes but I have no doubt that tesla very soon will be able to be safer than the average driver. Plus the more autonomous vehicles on the road the more safer it is. Finally currently tra…

Ok. But this idealism doesn’t work when Tesla has clear failure modes that simply shouldn’t happen during normal driving. Humans generally do not give their cars haircuts by slamming them under a stopped cargo truck. They do not generally smash straight into stationary emergency vehicles. We can’t handwave basic safety issues away by saying “in aggregate, they perform better than humans in most conditions.” The basic…

Assuming that in aggregate they do kill fewer humans, then this is a rare instance of an actual trolley problem. Do you want to kill fewer people by changing the norms and reasons?

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

#56

Post by enchiridion »

mplewis wrote: post #52
username_my1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is to have self driving safer than our average driver who’s always texting and driving, sometimes driving under the influence and sometimes just too stressed to pay attention to the road. Self driving cars will make fatal mistakes but I have no doubt that tesla very soon will be able to be safer than the average driver. Plus the more autonomous vehicles on the road the more safer it is. Finally currently tra…

Ok. But this idealism doesn’t work when Tesla has clear failure modes that simply shouldn’t happen during normal driving. Humans generally do not give their cars haircuts by slamming them under a stopped cargo truck. They do not generally smash straight into stationary emergency vehicles. We can’t handwave basic safety issues away by saying “in aggregate, they perform better than humans in most conditions.” The basic…

It’s not a fallacy, it’s a risk analysis that will save lives.

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

#57

Post by SuoDuanDao »

machinelearning wrote: post #37

Question for people here: Is it justifiable to accept these flaws in the short-term if it results in a car that has a lower-error rate than human drivers in the medium/long-term?

Hm. I find this very analogous to the MRNA vaccine debate: how high an error rate of a new technology do we accept, and to what degree does that choice have to be made at a community rather than an individual level?

I'd feel best if that decision was made at the smallest community level possible, so ideally county by county rather than federally. That lightens the burden of politicians making the wrong choice or being a citizen who disagrees with the right choice.

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

#58

Post by taneq »

gameswithgo wrote: post #17
grey-area wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Average humans have a higher error rate.

For me the question is how high is the error rate for a non drunk non sleepy non elderly non reckless human, since that is what my car would replace. in my 20s you would need to bring the reckless back in.

Only if you’re the only driver being replaced.

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

#59

Post by dreamcompiler »

gameswithgo wrote: post #16
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?

This has already been happening but self driving enthusiasts just keep thinking it is great. And regulators have done very little and otherwise smart people like Sandy Munro get extremely mad at what little regulators have hinted at. It is wild times.

Munro sat down with Musk and enthusiastically praised FSD but complained about how roads were often improperly painted. Musk--to his credit--said the car needed to work safely even in the presence of paint errors. (Video is on Munro's YT channel.) Munro is very critical of many aspects of car design; I cannot understand why he's such a fan of FSD.

I tried FSD on the $200/month plan and dropped it: It makes the car unsafe. To command a lane change you hold down the turn signal stalk. If you fail to hold it down long enough the car suddenly swerves back to the lane it was in. This is (to say the least) disconcerting at 80 mph.

FSD can also suddenly decide to do weird things that are difficult to correct even when you're paying close attention. It's unnerving. Ordinary autosteer (which is included with every Tesla at no extra charge) works well enough for me and it fails in more predictable ways; it's easy for me to build a mental model of its limitations. I'll stick with that.

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

#60

Post by virtue3 »

gameswithgo wrote: post #16
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?

This has already been happening but self driving enthusiasts just keep thinking it is great. And regulators have done very little and otherwise smart people like Sandy Munro get extremely mad at what little regulators have hinted at. It is wild times.

We didn't get the FAA regulations we have now until after a ton of people died in aviation accidents and the aviation industry figured they need to get their image together.

So... yeah it's gonna take a lot of deaths for this to get regulated. It's a shame cuz we already basically know how to regulate this.

Post reply on HN