Hacker News Reader

I thought they had remote drivers to take over when shit goes south?

No, remote operators are never in control of the vehicles. They give the computer hints about how to handle situations it's unable to resolve for itself, but the computer is ultimately still responsible for driving and maintaining the safety invariants.

This is fundamentally different from FSD, where the human is always responsible for driving and maintaining the safety invariants.

"They give the computer hints about how to handle situations"

That's a cute euphemism for remote operators.

It entails a completely different division of responsibilities and safety profile. Specifically, it's one of the critical differences between SAE levels 2/3 and level 4:

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/j3016/J3016_table.jpg

To give an analogy, let's say you use a credit card. A machine processes the payment most of the time, but occasionally something looks suspicious, so it denies the payment and sends a message to a human (you) asking whether the next payment should be allowed. Do you consider yourself to be a "driver" in this system?

If so, imagine a system where all payments flash by onscreen for a human that's tasked with stopping erroneous approvals in realtime. Are humans doing the essentially the same job in this system such that both roles are "drivers"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com