"...and that, ladies and gentlemen, is how I invented Thalidomide."
We're talking about a technology with the potential to cause accidental aneurisms and lobotomies. Maybe some conservatism really is in order?
We're talking about a technology with the potential to cause accidental aneurisms and lobotomies. Maybe some conservatism really is in order?
I ask this because we've had everything from chernobyl to the Columbia rocket explosion. We didn't hamstring those things. We got better at anticipating them.
The cry of every neuroscientist! The trick is how to make an ex vivo brain simalog at all.
Currently we use the brains of other animals. It gets you somewhere. I mean, you can deal with how the heart moves the brain about, how grooming and eating move the brain, you can even get seizures and ischemic events working with the tech. But, those last few percent is where all of it matters. Kinda like viewing an eclipse: the difference between 99.99% and 100% totality is everything.
And that's kinda the problem. Figuring out all the edge cases is really hard and time consuming. And making a faux-brain simalog is probably harder than just going slowly.
Some rather common edge cases go ignored. Unless they've updated Waymo in the last couple of months, they still fail to distinguish when they have a reserved destination lane when making right turns, as exhibited when going from eastbound Central to southbound Castro every damn day (before Castro was closed).
Self driving system vendors can claim that fewer deaths will occur with their system vs the average driver, but that mostly reflects how dangerous the "average"/distracted driver is. Those numbers are little comfort to the loved ones of someone killed in an "edge case" that a competent driver handles without injury.