Earlier quoted context omitted.
No LIDAR means zero ability to detect pedestrians in heavy fog, rain, and snow, right?
Other way around. LIDAR doesn't work in fog, rain and snow.
It does work better in the dark than cameras?
Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
91–100 of 123 posts
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#92> Academic research accelerates innovation, but it requires costly data that is out of reach for most academic teams. This is true of pretty much any AI research. Look at Puffer[0], which was just on HN a couple of days ago. They're running a free streaming service just to get enough data to train their algorithms, and in fact mention in their FAQ that they would love to use commercial data if they could get it. Unfo…
> Unfortunately, academic and commercial incentives don't really align here. Most commercial entities don't want to share their data because it's valuable to them, and if they let researchers in, they want the output of the research to remain proprietary to their commercial enterprise... I wonder if there isn't some sort of governance solution to this.
You're commenting on an article in which a commercial entity is sharing their data despite it being valuable to them. Maybe they are the outlier but I've seen plenty of companies share data, especially in the ML space. Here are some datasets[0]. Maybe you would prefer more, but compared to other fields there is a lot of sharing. A "governance solution" could make things worse. If there was some mandate that companies that collect this data have to share it in a costly way, then it would discourage collection.
[0] https://blog.cambridgespark.com/50-free-machine-learning-dat...
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP here, just waking up (I'm remote) - I can't edit my original comments so let me modify them here: I wasn't involved in our communications with Lyft, so I was talking about something I didn't know much about. My audience was just the anonymous commenteriat: turns out a lot of people whose opinion makes a material difference to Lyft/Scale read these comments too. Sorry for not realizing that; I probably wouldn't hav…
It's in your best interests to edit out the last part of your comment.
Maybe everyone here could stop asking this person to edit their comments? People have been banned by dang and co for much less...
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#94> Academic research accelerates innovation, but it requires costly data that is out of reach for most academic teams. This is true of pretty much any AI research. Look at Puffer[0], which was just on HN a couple of days ago. They're running a free streaming service just to get enough data to train their algorithms, and in fact mention in their FAQ that they would love to use commercial data if they could get it. Unfo…
AI ( neural networks) is sadly a "winner takes it all" markt...
Even if you create an algorithm five times better and faster, you still lack the data to feed it..
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#95> Academic research accelerates innovation, but it requires costly data that is out of reach for most academic teams. This is true of pretty much any AI research. Look at Puffer[0], which was just on HN a couple of days ago. They're running a free streaming service just to get enough data to train their algorithms, and in fact mention in their FAQ that they would love to use commercial data if they could get it. Unfo…
> Unfortunately, academic and commercial incentives don't really align here. Most commercial entities don't want to share their data because it's valuable to them, and if they let researchers in, they want the output of the research to remain proprietary to their commercial enterprise... I wonder if there isn't some sort of governance solution to this. You're commenting on an article in which a commercial entity is s…
> a commercial entity is sharing their data despite it being valuable to them
What's their incentive to share?
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately, academic and commercial incentives don't really align here. Most commercial entities don't want to share their data because it's valuable to them, and if they let researchers in, they want the output of the research to remain proprietary to their commercial enterprise... I wonder if there isn't some sort of governance solution to this. You're commenting on an article in which a commercial entity is s…
> a commercial entity is sharing their data despite it being valuable to them What's their incentive to share?
There's a few quick things that come to mind that may be possibilities:
1. If people use your dataset, they can do research into things relevant to you
2. Some people like working for companies that share data/code back with the community, helping hire & retain staff
3. Bits of publicity, either to potential engineers/researchers or others seeing lyft in a better light
4. Improvements in the domain, no matter where they come from, may be beneficial to your business
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately, academic and commercial incentives don't really align here. Most commercial entities don't want to share their data because it's valuable to them, and if they let researchers in, they want the output of the research to remain proprietary to their commercial enterprise... I wonder if there isn't some sort of governance solution to this. You're commenting on an article in which a commercial entity is s…
> a commercial entity is sharing their data despite it being valuable to them What's their incentive to share?
Likely they see self-driving as a complement to their core business of vehicle-passenger matching rather than something they hope to profit from directly in a meaningful manner, in which case "commoditize your complement" applies.
"A classic pattern in technology economics, identified by Joel Spolsky, is layers of the stack attempting to become monopolies while turning other layers into perfectly-competitive markets which are commoditized, in order to harvest most of the consumer surplus."
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately, academic and commercial incentives don't really align here. Most commercial entities don't want to share their data because it's valuable to them, and if they let researchers in, they want the output of the research to remain proprietary to their commercial enterprise... I wonder if there isn't some sort of governance solution to this. You're commenting on an article in which a commercial entity is s…
> a commercial entity is sharing their data despite it being valuable to them What's their incentive to share?
[deleted]
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#99This will go against the grain here on HN. I don't know how anyone can imagine self driving even succeeding in real world, leave alone in the so called third world, unless all vehicles are self driven and operate in a controlled environment. There are some really important things pending, like accurate NLP and computer vision, but no, we need something shiny and useless. I think some smart computer scientists are getting rich by carrot sticking some gullible billionaire investors. Good for them. I hope some of the really useful stuff piggy back on this rather lofty endeavor.
Re: Lyft releases self-driving research dataset
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would guess (I'm not a lawyer) that a commercial model would be in the clear as long as the company doesn't release anything including the data itself. Model weights that are derived from the data are not the data. I would make an analogy where the training data is like a textbook. If I read in a textbook about how to design/build a bridge, I don't have to give royalties to the textbook author when my civil enginee…
I disagree. The license specifies that "using the material for commercial purposes" is prohibited. The act of training a commercial model is obviously a commercial purpose. Whether or not the data is somehow incorporated into the resulting model is irrelevant. You're confusing this CC license with open source licenses that do not restrict use but require derived works to be created/distributed under certain condition…
CC is rarely a good license to choose other than to make yourself feel good. It does a terrible job of dealing with the actual matters of importance to a license outside of photo sharing (and even there it's not a good choice, as many photographers have found because it explicitly grants rights to others that the photographer may not be able to to grant to them, leaving the photographer open to lawsuits as has happened).
In this case, imagine a student working on a class assignment. They use this data for purely academic purposes with no commercial intent in mind. After they train their system, they realize yow I could use this trained system and get rich. There was arguably no commercial use during the training. The use of the data was purely academic, like a person learning math or French. What you do after running the learning is a separate matter, just as using a CC licensed textbook to learn math doesn't prevent you from getting a job as a statistician.
Again, the tl;dr is instead of trying to divine how a court will deal with a poorly specified problem, it's much better to just not license your stuff using a CC license. There are almost always much better licenses to choose from.