• TypicalHog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    It only matters if the autopilot does more kills than an average human driver on the same distance traveled.

    • NIB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      If the cars run over people while going 30kmh because they use cameras and a bug crashed into the camera and that caused the car to go crazy, that is not acceptable, even if the cars crash “less than humans”.

      Self driving needs to be highly regulated by law and demand to have some bare minimum sensors, including radars, lidars, etc. Camera only self driving is beyond stupid. Cameras cant see in snow or dark or whatever. Anyone who has a phone knows how fucky the camera can get under specific light exposures, etc.

      Noone but tesla is doing camera only “self driving” and they are only doing it in order to cut down the cost. Their older cars had more sensors than their newer cars. But Musk is living in his Bioshock uber capitalistic dream. Who cares if a few people die in the process of developing visual based self driving.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm2x6CVIXiE

      • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        What are you? Some kind of lidar shill? Camera only should obviously be the endgame goal for all robots. Also, this article is not even about camera only.

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’ve heard Elon Musk (or was it Karpathy?) talking about how camera should be sufficient for all scenarios because humans can do it on vision alone, but that’s poor reasoning IMO. Cars are not humans, so there’s no reason to confine them to the same limitations. If we want them to be safer and more capable than human drivers, one way to do that is by providing them with more information.

          • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            We built things like Lidars and ultrasound because we want better than our eyes at depth and sight.

          • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because that’s expensive and can be done with a camera. And once you figure the camera stuff out - you gucci. Now you can do all kinds of shit without needing a lidar on every single robot.

            • Zink@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              My eyes are decent, but if I had a sixth sense that gave me full accurate 3D 360 spatial awareness regardless of visibility, I would probably not turn it off just to use my eyes. I’d use both.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      this is bullshit.

      A human can be held accountable for their failure, bet you a fucking emerald mine Musk won’t be held accountable for these and all the other fool self drive fuckups.

      • sabin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So you’d rather live in a world where people die more often, just so you can punish the people who do the killing?

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s a terrifically misguided interpretation of what I said, wow.

          LISTEN UP BRIGHT LIGHTS, ACCOUNTABILITY ISN’T A LUXURY. It’s not some ‘nice to have add-on’.

          Musk’s gonna find out. Gonna break all his fanboys’ hearts too.

          • sabin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Nothing was misguided and if anything your tone deaf attempt to double down only proves the point I’m making.

            This stopped being about human deaths for you a long time ago.

            Let’s not even bother to ask the question of whether or not this guy could ultimately be saving lives. All that matters to you is that you have a target to take your anger out on the event that a loved one dies in an accident or something.

            You are shallow beyond belief.

            • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              This stopped being about human deaths for you a long time ago.

              Nope, it’s about accountability. The fact that you can’t see how important accountability is just says you’re a musk fan boy. If Musk would shut the fuck up and do the work, he’d be better off - instead he’s cheaping out left and right on literal life dependent tech, so tesla’s stock gets a bump. It’s ridiculous, like your entire argument.

    • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is the actual logical way to think about self driving cars. Stop down voting him because “Tesla bad” you fuckin goons.

      • gallopingsnail@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Tesla’s self driving appears to be less safe and causes more accidents than their competitors.

        “NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation said in documents released Friday that it completed “an extensive body of work” which turned up evidence that “Tesla’s weak driver engagement system was not appropriate for Autopilot’s permissive operating capabilities.”

        Tesla bad.

        • nxdefiant@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          No one else has the same capability in as wide a geographic range. Waymo, Cruise, Blue Cruise, Mercedes, etc are all geolocked to certain areas or certain stretches of road.

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t quite understand what they mean by this. It tracks drivers with a camera and the steering wheel sensor and literally turns itself off if you stop paying attention. What more can they do?

          • nxdefiant@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The NHSTA hasn’t issued rules for these things either.

            the U.S. gov has issued general guidelines for the technology/industry here:

            https://www.transportation.gov/av/4

            They have an article on it discussing levels of automation here:

            https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-safety/automated-vehicles-safety

            By all definitions layed out in that article:

            BlueCruise, Super Cruise, Mercedes’ thing is a lvl3 system ( you must be alert to reengage when the conditions for their operation no longer apply )

            Tesla’s FSD is a lvl 3 system (the system will warn you when you must reengage for any reason)

            Waymo and Cruise are a lvl 4 system (geolocked)

            Lvl 5 systems don’t exist.

            What we don’t have is any kind of federal laws:

            https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/autonomous-vehicles

            Separated into two sections – voluntary guidance and technical assistance to states – the new guidance focuses on SAE international levels of automation 3-5, clarifies that entities do not need to wait to test or deploy their ADS, revises design elements from the safety self-assessment, aligns federal guidance with the latest developments and terminology, and clarifies the role of federal and state governments.

            The guidance reinforces the voluntary nature of the guidelines and does not come with a compliance requirement or enforcement mechanism.

            (emphasis mine)

            The U.S. has operated on a “states are laboratories for laws” principal since its founding. The current situation is in line with that principle.

            These are not my opinions, these are all facts.