You’re being too pedantic. We clearly have cars that do a lot of their own driving, we clearly have people (multiple) making claims, and we clearly have at least one company piloting self-driving taxis. Let’s consider our ethics before it’s too late
Elon claims Tesla is already past that point. I’ll accept a much larger approximation that several manufacturers are past or near that point. Even if you’re skeptical of the claim, it’s clearly close enough to be concerned about.
In this context they’re identical - some automated process looking at all your content. While some of these agents may be honest, there’s no real distinction from search or ai or archive.
No manufacturer does good self-driving yet.
Several manufacturers including Tesla make driver assistants more reliable than humans in at least some cases, possibly most of the time.
It’s easy to say you don’t want to allow companies to profit from unsafe technology that kills people but what is the other choice? If you send the trolley down the other track, you’re choosing different deaths at the hands of unsafe humans. We will soon be at the point, or already are, that your choice kills more people. Is that really such an easy choice?
Is the ai doing anything that isn’t already allowed for humans. The thing is, generative ai doesn’t copy someone’s art. It’s more akin to learning from someone’s art and creating you own art with that influence. Given that we want to continue allowing hunans access to art for learning, what’s the logical difference to an ai doing the same?
Did this already play out at Reddit? Ai was one of the reasons I left but I believe it’s a different scenario. I freely contributed my content to Reddit for the purposes of building an interactive community, but they changed the terms without my consent. I did NOT contribute my content so they could make money selling it for ai training
The only logical distinction I see with s ai aren’t human: an exception for humans does not apply to non-humans even if the activity is similar
We already have that
Yes, we have the definitions, but I haven’t read about whether they’re effectively required. Is there a test, a certification authority, rules for liability or revocation? Have we established a way to actually require it.
I hope we wouldn’t let manufacturers self-certify, although historical data is important evidence. I hope we don’t aid profitability of manufacturers by either limiting liability or creating a path to justice doomed to fail
The thing is humans are horrible drivers, costing a huge toll in lives and property every year.
We may already be at the point where we need to deal with the ethics of inadequate self-driving causing too many accidents vs human causing more. We can clearly see the shortcomings of all self driving technology so far, but is it ethical to block Immature technology if it does overall save lives?
Maybe it’s the trolley problem. Should we take the branch that leads to deaths or the branch that leads to more deaths
Presumably we have the intelligence to set requirements before something can be called self-driving - that’s usually what the fuss is about, whether the marketing is claiming it’s something it’s not.
If they fail with their approach, I’m fine with that, just like I’m fine if Waymo fails with their approach. Of either succeeds, why should I care how? Obviously there’s a problem if it runs over some old lady at a stop sign and drags them down the street but that’s clearly a failure for them
Cameras alone are not sufficient enough for autonomous driving.
I disagree with this assertion, because they’re correct that the only being that can currently drive is relying on vision. Vision alone is sufficient for driving.
But autonomous driving really hasn’t succeeded yet. We still have no idea what is required for autonomous driving or whether we can do it at all, regardless of sensors.
So you’re implying that we can definitely do autonomous driving but can’t do it the way humans do, whereas I say we won’t know the requirements until we find some that succeed, and we may never
I tried fsd demo this spring and it’s getting pretty good. I wouldn’t use it but it was perfect on well marked roads. The thing is it made me realize just how poorly maintained our roads are and everything is an edge case. For example it didn’t stay in lane at one Intersection but the intersection was a weird offset plus the lines were all faded away. Although I also disnt give it any chance to recover so I suppose it could have been ok: Im not risking it not recovering
It might surprise everyone but mostly by staying in a well maintained well mapped area, like Waymo did. There’s no way it fulfills the claim of self-driving everywhere without more improvements
The robots is will have the next generation computer and higher resolution cameras which may help. However that also allows more overhead for the next ai update
Actually I do. The thing is a Chromebook can’t really do things you normally associate with performance, like gaming. However I’ve found decent ones to have a snappier ui than low to medium windows laptops
That’s the thing with a tablet: what’s your use case?
I’m not a fan of the keyboard and mice: they work well enough but now you have a bunch of pieces to keep track of and you need a table or desk. If I need a keyboard I prefer a laptop/chromebook form factor because it’s just one piece to deal with and you can use it on your lap
I realized that I spend way too much time e consuming media, but with light typing, such as this reply. a tablet is great and I’m perfectly happy writing on screen. Actually I’m on my phone at the moment. I do use my phone for most things, so maybe I think of the tablet as a larger phone screen for times I don’t need to be as portable
If so, I never learned that lesson. When I first heard about the one chip challenge, I was seriously tempted to challenge my teens to see if they could beat me
Technically it’s the intended result. It helped fund one or more purely EV manufacturers for the future. Legacy companies chose not to invest n new technology for the longest time, but had to pay the price. At some point that price is too high but the innovators are awarded and the technology has become cheaper, so the surviving legacy manufacturers can adopt it. Ts a good thing that it helped fund a successful EV manufacturer by penalizing the laggards. That was the goal
The only real failure is the credits were apparently too cheap since legacy manufacturers still had to be forced, and are still regressing the first chance they get
Or instead of trying to keep Airlines’s from sinking, we could invest in intercity rail, so there would be travel options. Imagine having a choice
Not good. There’s still some remnant of the idealistic vision, hiding from the Nazi.
Welcome fellow codger. Back in my day we had books made from real paper and we loved in. Handing in an assignment meant writing by hand in actual paper and physically handing it to the teacher.
Everything is online. My kids have had very few physical textbooks in years. “Writing a paper” means typing into a n online document. “Handing in” an assignment means dropping some sort of file into an online folder. It’s not really a matter of learning anything, but that school resources are all online and every student needs access.
Also the online services are all “free”. Yeah they might be exploited by advertising but no kid pays and no kid is locked into a commercial vendor (Google at least doesn’t charge)
I was having a similar conversation with my teen - out hiking and wondering how the trails were built and maintained. We talked scouting service projects and all the way back to the WPA, but have no actual info. The park is a hill so there are several rough stone stairways up to the ridge trail. They probably last years but do need attention
Occasionally you see online ideas about a year of service for every new adult and this would be a good option
Hurt low income people, mortgage our future, sell off national assets to enrich oligarchs, personal enrichment. Yep, that’s about the speed for DODE