Because it's a horrible idea, and I see a pack of lemmings drooling like it's the next iPad and not a single voice of skepticism. Computers aren't people, and you all should know that you shouldn't trust some promised AI that not a single one of you has any experience with. It's vaporware.
I understand, you all have long commutes, but that doesn't mean that we're ready for a damn iCar.
Therefore you're just fine with putting machines on the road that you KNOW won't have any judgement? Just because some human drivers aren't good? You want fleets of more insentient drivers? How is that acceptable?
There's a lot of filtering to hide just how inaccurate GPSes are. That doesn't matter when a human is looking at a screen and ignoring it when it's obviously wrong. But it makes a huge difference when an idiotic machine is driving.
The moment something in reality changes, the map is wrong.
The moment there's radio interference, the GPS doesn't work.
The moment one of 10^20 things you know about but a machine wouldn't changes, you'd know that something was wrong but a machine wouldn't. Is it really that hard to see that having machine driving before machine intelligence is idiotic?
How about if we make sure that machines can do ordinary tasks before we put them in a position of endangering everyone who goes near a road?
Sure we'll have intelligent machines one day. So we're suppose to have machines driving vehicles some 80 years before they're smart? What idiot thought THAT was a good idea?
That's a fact about "self driving vehicles". Now what is supposed to make them worth the risk to every person in society who might be near a road sometime?
life and death situations. I'm a big fan of A.I. including "strong AI" (means actually sentient) a big enough fan that I know that we're no\where near having competent general A.I. let alone some incompetent version of strong A.I.
Only sentient beings should be allowed to drive. Period.
Really. I can't believe that all these nerds like to pretend that their toys are actually thinking. They're not. And "self driving cars" won't know that they're driving, won't know what a human is, won't know what a horse is, won't know what ANY OF THE THINGS IN THE ENVIRONMENT ARE. They won't recognize when trillion of possible conditions are strange.
You want something totally insentient DRIVING A CAR?
the intelligence to avoid situations better than say an actually intelligent being?
What the hell are you thinking?
And you know "you are already screwed" situations happen all the time. Putting a damn computer in the driver's seat just insures that we having something insentient, incapable of understanding the situation "making decisions" when those situations happen.
I put "making decisions" in quotes because a moronic machine has no idea that it's making decisions. God.
Do you really think so little of thought that it never occurs to you that it's important?
Just great. Some corporation will figure that having a driverless car will save them some $8 an hour (or say $8 a day in a 3rd world hellhole) and bribe officials into accepting some Windows Vista death traps veering around your city! And there won't be a damn thing you can do about it.
I have no doubt that there are morons like the Uber CEO who would try self driving cars, but there are morons who take peach pits for cancer.
There won't be self driving cars. Not after the morons learn the hard way that having something dumber than an ant driving a car is a horrible horrible idea.
The only question is, will it take any deaths, or will intelligent people make the decision first?
I'll answer for him because, who is going to stop me? I'm only in favor of implantable microchips in cute and lovable humans. If that human would be as missed as a puppy if it wandered across the street and got lost, then sure.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you test? All of the "ran someone over" bugs will have to be labeled "can not reproduce!"
Thank you!
Because it's a horrible idea, and I see a pack of lemmings drooling like it's the next iPad and not a single voice of skepticism. Computers aren't people, and you all should know that you shouldn't trust some promised AI that not a single one of you has any experience with. It's vaporware.
I understand, you all have long commutes, but that doesn't mean that we're ready for a damn iCar.
iCar asap. They can't wait to see a real car driven by a furby! It doesn't matter how dangerous it is.
Naw, they're just Apple reality-distortion-field brainwashed to salivate whenever they hear about a new toy.
Therefore you're just fine with putting machines on the road that you KNOW won't have any judgement? Just because some human drivers aren't good? You want fleets of more insentient drivers? How is that acceptable?
Say there's an earthquake. Or a rockslide. Or an avalanche.
Humans can see if there's a gap in the road. They can see if the road has moved. They can judge unusual conditions.
If the roads are full of machine drivers will have to simply stop, because the machines won't have the judgement to handle the situations.
would make an awesome way to kidnap.
In this case that last 20% is consciousness and knowledge and judgement.
It's gonna take a good 99.999999% of the effort
What's wrong with hiring drivers?
There's a lot of filtering to hide just how inaccurate GPSes are. That doesn't matter when a human is looking at a screen and ignoring it when it's obviously wrong. But it makes a huge difference when an idiotic machine is driving.
The moment something in reality changes, the map is wrong.
The moment there's radio interference, the GPS doesn't work.
The moment one of 10^20 things you know about but a machine wouldn't changes, you'd know that something was wrong but a machine wouldn't. Is it really that hard to see that having machine driving before machine intelligence is idiotic?
How about if we make sure that machines can do ordinary tasks before we put them in a position of endangering everyone who goes near a road?
Sure we'll have intelligent machines one day. So we're suppose to have machines driving vehicles some 80 years before they're smart? What idiot thought THAT was a good idea?
That's a fact about "self driving vehicles". Now what is supposed to make them worth the risk to every person in society who might be near a road sometime?
life and death situations. I'm a big fan of A.I. including "strong AI" (means actually sentient) a big enough fan that I know that we're no\where near having competent general A.I. let alone some incompetent version of strong A.I.
Only sentient beings should be allowed to drive. Period.
and software doesn't have it.
Really. I can't believe that all these nerds like to pretend that their toys are actually thinking. They're not. And "self driving cars" won't know that they're driving, won't know what a human is, won't know what a horse is, won't know what ANY OF THE THINGS IN THE ENVIRONMENT ARE. They won't recognize when trillion of possible conditions are strange.
You want something totally insentient DRIVING A CAR?
Are you all insentient yourselves?
the intelligence to avoid situations better than say an actually intelligent being?
What the hell are you thinking?
And you know "you are already screwed" situations happen all the time. Putting a damn computer in the driver's seat just insures that we having something insentient, incapable of understanding the situation "making decisions" when those situations happen.
I put "making decisions" in quotes because a moronic machine has no idea that it's making decisions. God.
Do you really think so little of thought that it never occurs to you that it's important?
the opposite of "really cool."
They're "really cool" in the same way that genital herpes is "really cool".
:) just wait till terrorist nerds are programming self driving cars to cause accidents on purpose. It will be fun like battlebots!
Just great. Some corporation will figure that having a driverless car will save them some $8 an hour (or say $8 a day in a 3rd world hellhole) and bribe officials into accepting some Windows Vista death traps veering around your city! And there won't be a damn thing you can do about it.
Because $8!
self fighting wars. Hell we don't even need a country, just set out bots to kill people and call that a war.
I have no doubt that there are morons like the Uber CEO who would try self driving cars, but there are morons who take peach pits for cancer.
There won't be self driving cars. Not after the morons learn the hard way that having something dumber than an ant driving a car is a horrible horrible idea.
The only question is, will it take any deaths, or will intelligent people make the decision first?
I'll answer for him because, who is going to stop me? I'm only in favor of implantable microchips in cute and lovable humans. If that human would be as missed as a puppy if it wandered across the street and got lost, then sure.
well, Randal Monroe beat him to the "fuck computational linguistics" punchline.
That's hardly fair. It's a bit like saying that the Dead Kennedies pail in comparison with Mozart.