As a blind pedestrian, I am sincerely afraid of the future. The first time that I feel like innovation is putting me in danger.
The only argument is whether that's realistic.
Human drivers are still, mile-for-mile, the most dangerous threat to all pedestrians, blind and sighted.
Yes, my suggested solution applies to everyone. I suggested it to you because you have fear, many people do not.
The solutions certainly lower individual risk.
It also sounded ironic to me, I thought others might notice and appreciate the irony in my suggestion.
I don't understand how "Vertrauensgrundsatz" applies here.
However, the advanced, LLM based systems with tons of world knowledge (and therefore can easily tell if a pedestrian is abnormal) take tons of processing power and latency, so cannot be deployed in the current AI driving systems. So it'll take 5-10 years for this to be solved.
Also hope you know that Germany isn't the center of the world. Its not even the center in terms of cars anymore. German regulators don't get to dictate the progress of self driving.
You are not afraid of corrupt bureaucrats, but of idealistic innovators trying to change the world?
By the way, there is no way to tame safety via checklists or 'policies'. Boeing sure had checklists and layers of policies trying to control risk, can't save them when they outsource everything to workers who don't give a crap about their job.
But people in the AI world care, they absolutely do care about what they build. Pride and passion in their work beats any checklists, and I'm confident self driving cars will be a massive safety boon for all.
The "run" part happened afterwards and should of course be punished harshly but the "hit" part seems to be her own fault.
Cruise and Waymo are inviting catastrophe by having their embryonic systems practising on public roads without a human in the driver's seat. None of these systems are anywhere near good enough to be let loose unmonitored. I know it's unpopular to praise Tesla here, but in my view they deserve some credit for sitting pretty at SAE L2 while everyone else seems obsessed with quickly impressing investors with a half-baked rush to L3 or L4.
Having taken Waymo a number of times in SF now, I have experienced this once. The car stopped and an unsolicited call from customer support came into the car to check on things.
While subjective my experience in Waymo has been positive and feels surprisingly safe.
The car drives conservatively but naturally. It shows a great understanding of other cars and people and cones from LIDAR on its HUD. It takes safe routes and picks safe side streets and alleys for pick up and drop off. There is a real-time support team watching things.
I doubt it’s ready for every city — SF is well equipped for public transportation with lots of well mapped local taxi routes and loading zones in the city.
And there will be surprises and accidents.
But it’s absolutely wild that we’ve reached this level of self driving, and it will be transformative for human kind as it continues to improve.
“Rush” is subjective. Waymo have been driving around with human drivers for years before let loose and they are still highly restricted to city limits and local routes. And I was taking design courses in self driving control systems taught by General Motors back in uni in 2005.
I can’t reconcile the industry’s assertion that safety is the penultimate objective with our testing these things, uncontrolled, in densely populated urban areas.
More optimistically, at least it’s possible to diagnose these mistakes and work to mitigate them. The fact that we could now start treating auto collisions as seriously as plane incidents might be reason to hope.
The main criticism has always been that they were developing at a glacial pace.
What alternative path to deployment would you propose?
My concerns with Tesla are primarily about the safety implications of how it's automation capabilities get marketed, rather than the hardware itself… I also don't "get" the obsession over the "vision only" approach, which seems like an unwarranted compromise to me.
"Tech culture" intersecting with safety critical products and services indeed needs to be reckoned with.
Of course, not that long ago, a fair number of people were looking forward to a near-future when they'd have a personal robo-taxi at their beck and call. And it's pretty clear that's not happening anytime soon.
Predictions of the future have always been poor, but ML/AI has thoroughly fucked up any prior intuitions we had around the rate of advancement. So many things progressing more rapidly than we thought possible, while others being an endless slog of local maxima after local maxima.
At this point, even some relative skeptics like Rodney Brooks are probably looking overly optimistic in terms of timelines.
I suspect that current approaches only take us so far and some other things from cognitive science and so forth will need to be pulled in.
Sure, but that once can be still pretty far away for general conditions.
And you can't get that data with a safety driver in the car. A safety driver should always override in emergency situations, whether necessary or not.
Also, we could lower amount of people who die to human drivers too and I am all for it. Speed limits, regulations about car design, higher driving age, better public transport, there is a lot that could be done.