# Future Shock: Arrested For DFI (Driving Fully Independently)



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

"What seems to be the problem, officer?"

"We're arresting you for a DFI. It's illegal to drive your own car in this jurisdiction."

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/the-fight-for-the-right-to-drive


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

I can't wait til an SDC mows down a senators son or daughter, or even a senator themself.


----------



## DougTheUberDriver (Apr 28, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> I can't wait til an SDC mows down a senators son or daughter, or even a senator themself.


SDC doing the lord's work


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

And cars name will be VIKI


----------



## DougTheUberDriver (Apr 28, 2019)

krbjmpr said:


> And cars name will be VIKI


or KITT


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

nah, KITT didn't try to kill people. 
KARR on the other hand...

I think we watched too much 80s TV. At least I did.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> I can't wait til an SDC mows down a senators son or daughter, or even a senator themself.


Learn to HACK !


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

_*Whilst playing Outrun you hear a robotic voice... *_

Would you like to play a game?


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/the-fight-for-the-right-to-drive


Brought to you by the funeral industry and the traffic revenue division. 
Once SDCs are certified and in our lives it will be hard to go back to traffic tickets and 30,000 deaths per year. The future is 99% SDCs and Germany-level driver's license training.


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Is that better than Sears Driving School?


----------



## DougTheUberDriver (Apr 28, 2019)

krbjmpr said:


> Is that better than Sears Driving School?


or in my case, no school. back when i got my licence, you just filled out a form, took a test and made sure you could parallel park. i was out on the road by myself within a couple of hours with barely a clue what i was doing.

good times


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Took me a couple shots to get mine. Part of route had a hidden speed limit sign on other side of intersection. First night I got it, busted for jumping railroad tracks. Ahh the time when we were young(er). My kids probably will try to take away my license and vehicles soon.

anybody else notice that formatting bar isn't working right now? no bold, italics, underline, etc... all greyed out.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> Brought to you by the funeral industry and the traffic revenue division.
> Once SDCs are certified and in our lives it will be hard to go back to traffic tickets and 30,000 deaths per year. The future is 99% SDCs and Germany-level driver's license training.


Dream on.

Those things are gonna kill a lot of people.

You'll see...



krbjmpr said:


> Took me a couple shots to get mine. Part of route had a hidden speed limit sign on other side of intersection. First night I got it, busted for jumping railroad tracks. Ahh the time when we were young(er). My kids probably will try to take away my license and vehicles soon.
> 
> anybody else notice that formatting bar isn't working right now? no bold, italics, underline, etc... all greyed out.


Tap the gear icon.

Every time it goes gray the gear icon reactivates the functions.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> Dream on.
> 
> Those things are gonna kill a lot of people.
> 
> You'll see...


They don't have to be perfect, they just have to be better than human drivers, which is a low bar.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> They don't have to be perfect, they just have to be better than human drivers, which is a low bar.


Not true.

Do the math.

On any given day you have hundreds of millions to over a billion cars in operation all over the world (2 billion by 2035). In most of these places the transportation corridors are a complete f-ing mess, the US included, and ESPECIALLY LA, for which there is no excuse.

Go to the busiest, most chaotic intersections anywhere in the US and you could go weeks and even months before seeing a significant collision, let alone an injury or fatality.

Most drivers receive a fairly pathetic amount of skills and knowledge training and testing to get a license. Hell, in CA you don't even need to parallel park anymore for your road test.

Given the sheer volume of moving vehicles in all of this madness it's actually quite impressive that more aren't injured and killed.

Now, compare this to AV's. To date, when comparing the number of miles driven by humans to that of AV's the latter are performing much more poorly. In conditions that are even remotely challenging they're failing miserably.

Until tech and auto manufacturers face the sobering reality that the transportation infrastructure needs a full blown overhaul - that they will have to foot the majority cost of like they did under Ike - there is no future for these utopian vehicles if the future.

The rabid competition and lust to be first to market will almost certainly prove to be a blood bath.

Auto manufacturers have an atrocious history when it comes to public safety concerns.

I wish you'd do your homework on this. I wish everyone would.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Aviation wasn't always safer than driving, but now it is.

Indeed, the roll-out process of SDCs can go several ways. We can start with the easiest task of rural freeway driving on a clear day, and progressively certify SDCs for more difficult tasks as they prove themselves. Anything can be a "bloodbath" without proper regulation, but as long as SDC development is allowed to continue, SDCs will eventually surpass humans in all conceivable categories. SDC development is difficult but once an improvement is made, it is permanent and rolled out to the entire fleet, unlike people who have to be individually trained.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

DougTheUberDriver said:


> or KITT :wink:


Or MONICAR.
Able to fell high-ranking politicians with just a single blow.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> Brought to you by the funeral industry and the traffic revenue division.
> Once SDCs are certified and in our lives it will be hard to go back to traffic tickets and 30,000 deaths per year. The future is 99% SDCs and Germany-level driver's license training.


SDC's cause more tickets and deaths than humans since they are physically impossible to think like a human.



Carbuncle said:


> Not true.
> 
> Do the math.
> 
> ...


only tomato and his numerous duplicate accounts think that SDC's can actually work



badratings said:


> Aviation wasn't always safer than driving, but now it is.
> 
> Indeed, the roll-out process of SDCs can go several ways. We can start with the easiest task of rural freeway driving on a clear day, and progressively certify SDCs for more difficult tasks as they prove themselves. Anything can be a "bloodbath" without proper regulation, but as long as SDC development is allowed to continue, SDCs will eventually surpass humans in all conceivable categories. SDC development is difficult but once an improvement is made, it is permanent and rolled out to the entire fleet, unlike people who have to be individually trained.


aviation and cars both use humans to ensure they work

you take the humans out and you have many more times the deaths, but you knew that already


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> SDC's cause more tickets and deaths than humans since they are physically impossible to think like a human.


The reason SDCs will be better than human is precisely because they won't think like humans. SDCs will never drive fatigued or drugged/drunk. SDCs will never decide "55mph" actually means "85mph".



uberdriverfornow said:


> only tomato and his numerous duplicate accounts think that SDC's can actually work


Anyone who disagrees with me is a duplicate account



uberdriverfornow said:


> aviation and cars both use humans to ensure they work
> you take the humans out and you have many more times the deaths, but you knew that already


The point is technology that is safer in the long run always starts out less safe in the development process.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> Aviation wasn't always safer than driving, but now it is.
> 
> Indeed, the roll-out process of SDCs can go several ways. We can start with the easiest task of rural freeway driving on a clear day, and progressively certify SDCs for more difficult tasks as they prove themselves. Anything can be a "bloodbath" without proper regulation, but as long as SDC development is allowed to continue, SDCs will eventually surpass humans in all conceivable categories. SDC development is difficult but once an improvement is made, it is permanent and rolled out to the entire fleet, unlike people who have to be individually trained.


Any comparison of AV's to air travel is laughable on its face.

I'll leave you to figure out why.


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Just wait for people delivery oriented autonomous flying vehicles. I am sure the tech companies will be able to build upon the current technology of going from point a to point b. 

You know, like that used by cruise missiles, inter-continental ballistic missiles, air to air, air to ground, ground to air missiles, observe and intercept platforms like predator. 

Heck, the smart bombs and multiple warhead technology could be applied to express and pool services.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

krbjmpr said:


> Just wait for people delivery oriented autonomous flying vehicles. I am sure the tech companies will be able to build upon the current technology of going from point a to point b.
> 
> You know, like that used by cruise missiles, inter-continental ballistic missiles, air to air, air to ground, ground to air missiles, observe and intercept platforms like predator.
> 
> Heck, the smart bombs and multiple warhead technology could be applied to express and pool services.


Go easy on smoking your breakfast.


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Sorrybutnotimetoeatbreakfastsinceiamina
rushandhadtoskipbreakfastbecauseihavesomanyriderstopickuptokeepmyuberprostatusanditis5pointtimerightnow.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

krbjmpr said:


> Sorrybutnotimetoeatbreakfastsinceiamina
> rushandhadtoskipbreakfastbecauseihavesomanyriderstopickuptokeepmyuberprostatusanditis5pointtimerightnow.


My mistake.

Go easy on snorting your breakfast and chasing it with a triple Red Bull.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> The reason SDCs will be better than human is precisely because they won't think like humans. SDCs will never drive fatigued or drugged/drunk. SDCs will never decide "55mph" actually means "85mph".
> 
> Anyone who disagrees with me is a duplicate account
> 
> The point is technology that is safer in the long run always starts out less safe in the development process.


when you got unedited video 15+ minutes or longer showing SDC's are better than humans on actual city streets we'd love to see it

but you never will 'cause they don't work

thanks for playing



krbjmpr said:


> Just wait for people delivery oriented autonomous flying vehicles. I am sure the tech companies will be able to build upon the current technology of going from point a to point b.
> 
> You know, like that used by cruise missiles, inter-continental ballistic missiles, air to air, air to ground, ground to air missiles, observe and intercept platforms like predator.
> 
> Heck, the smart bombs and multiple warhead technology could be applied to express and pool services.


we've been waiting for many years now

and we'll be waiting forever


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> when you got unedited video 15+ minutes or longer showing SDC's are better than humans on actual city streets we'd love to see it
> 
> but you never will 'cause they don't work
> 
> thanks for playing


Right because "busy city streets" are the only type of driving. Self driving technology will take over the low hanging fruit first. There are millions of easy interstate miles in the south waiting to be automated.The self driving truck could drive non-stop cross country on its own, and then a driver takes over for the final leg into the city.
Maybe you will never see full self driving technology within your lifetime, but the technology is coming, and it's going to replace human drivers bit by bit.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> when you got unedited video 15+ minutes or longer showing SDC's are better than humans on actual city streets we'd love to see it
> 
> but you never will 'cause they don't work
> 
> ...


I won't be convinced until I see bot cars consistently outperforming the best commercial drivers (like London's Black Cab Drivers) in torrential storms and blizzards - at night - and on winding mountain roads with nasty pitches, again at night in the worst weather possible.

Driving in LA at night in the rain is nuts enough. The road markings disappear because the city and county refuse to keep everything freshly painted and use the cheapest quality paints they can get away with.

INFRASTRUCTURE, dammit!!! What we have now is a joke and none of the people who should be paying for it want to.

Bot cars will be a disaster. The idiotic libertarian obsessions of tech jerks guarantees it.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> I won't be convinced until I see bot cars consistently outperforming the best commercial drivers (like London's Black Cab Drivers) in torrential storms and blizzards - at night - and on winding mountain roads with nasty pitches, again at night in the worst weather possible.
> 
> Driving in LA at night in the rain is nuts enough. The road markings disappear because the city and county refuse to keep everything freshly painted and use the cheapest quality paints they can get away with.
> 
> ...


"Bot cars" don't have to be capable of worst case scenarios to reduce driving jobs. Corporations aren't above putting drivers "on-call" for the rain/snow nights, while they rake in profits on clear days on well maintained roads. Hell, they'd probably fix and repaint the roads themselves if it means they don't have to pay drivers.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> Right because "busy city streets" are the only type of driving. Self driving technology will take over the low hanging fruit first. There are millions of easy interstate miles in the south waiting to be automated.The self driving truck could drive non-stop cross country on its own, and then a driver takes over for the final leg into the city.
> Maybe you will never see full self driving technology within your lifetime, but the technology is coming, and it's going to replace human drivers bit by bit.


Without the infrastructure it won't happen. And the regions you're mentioning have almost no market value for these vehicles. Empty roads and highways and suburban track home sprawl can't come anywhere near generating the necessary revenue to support these very costly fleets.

The fact that there's virtually no conversation being had about the infrastructural issues is proof enough of how delusional techies are being about all of this. They just don't grasp the intricacies of the real world dynamics involved.

Look at all the issues that all devices still have. Now imagine putting your life in one and hoping there isn't a glitch. And look at how flawed the apps still are a decade later. All the map apps STILL haven't worked with the DOT to input where all the controlled intersections are.

Y'all are dreaming. The nightmares will follow.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> Right because "busy city streets" are the only type of driving. Self driving technology will take over the low hanging fruit first. There are millions of easy interstate miles in the south waiting to be automated.The self driving truck could drive non-stop cross country on its own, and then a driver takes over for the final leg into the city.
> Maybe you will never see full self driving technology within your lifetime, but the technology is coming, and it's going to replace human drivers bit by bit.


ummmm...busy city streets are the most difficult type of driving

but we know SDC's don't even drive themselves to begin with, it's all a charade to keep the investor money pumping in and to ensure there are no accidents to report or deaths to report, which would be happening all the time if they actually allowed the cars to drive themselves as they say they do


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> ummmm...busy city streets are the most difficult type of driving
> 
> but we know SDC's don't even drive themselves to begin with, it's all a charade to keep the investor money pumping in and to ensure there are no accidents to report or deaths to report, which would be happening all the time if they actually allowed the cars to drive themselves as they say they do


Without a complete redo of the nation's transportation infrastructure these things stand no chance of working well.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> Without a complete redo of the nation's transportation infrastructure these things stand no chance of working well.


it doesn't matter what they change, they can't put a human brain into a robot


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> All the map apps STILL haven't worked with the DOT to input where all the controlled intersections are.


Google streetview (GSV) has pretty decent coverage of the US. If they wanted, they could hire a bunch of people to label each intersection based on pictures from GSV.



uberdriverfornow said:


> ummmm...busy city streets are the most difficult type of driving


I never said it wasnt



uberdriverfornow said:


> but we know SDC's don't even drive themselves to begin with, it's all a charade to keep the investor money pumping in and to ensure there are no accidents to report or deaths to report, which would be happening all the time if they actually allowed the cars to drive themselves as they say they do


During testing, each time the safety driver intervenes it is logged, and the companies publish data of the frequency of interventions. Of course, if you have proof that the companies are falsifying their data you are welcome to share it


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> Google streetview (GSV) has pretty decent coverage of the US. If they wanted, they could hire a bunch of people to label each intersection based on pictures from GSV.
> 
> I never said it wasnt
> 
> During testing, each time the safety driver intervenes it is logged, and the companies publish data of the frequency of interventions. Of course, if you have proof that the companies are falsifying their data you are welcome to share it


Uber initially falsified information about the woman they killed in AZ. And it's obvious they doctored the dashcam footage. Local drivers proved as much. That road is exceptionally well illuminated.



uberdriverfornow said:


> it doesn't matter what they change, they can't put a human brain into a robot


True. But if they fixed all the roads and installed guidance beacons on lamp posts and under the asphalt it would make a HUGE difference in the performance of the AV's.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> Uber initially falsified information about the woman they killed in AZ. And it's obvious they doctored the dashcam footage. Local drivers proved as much. That road is exceptionally well illuminated.


Ah yes. Check out this infographic: https://www.statista.com/chart/17144/test-miles-and-reportable-miles-per-disengagement/
Slimy unprofitable crime company that drove the least amount relatively few miles with the most frequent disengagements, trying to get out of a crash where the safety driver had her head down and the car's crash avoiding functions were turned off, by dimming the footage a bit. = all self driving car companies are faking their intervention/disengagement data.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> Ah yes. Check out this infographic: https://www.statista.com/chart/17144/test-miles-and-reportable-miles-per-disengagement/
> Slimy unprofitable crime company that drove the least amount relatively few miles with the most frequent disengagements, trying to get out of a crash where the safety driver had her head down and the car's crash avoiding functions were turned off, by dimming the footage a bit. = all self driving car companies are faking their intervention/disengagement data.


Look into the crap Anthony Levandowski pulled while still at Waymo that nearly killed a fellow engineer (he required multiple painful back surgeries). And just look at that lunatic in general.

I can't for the life of me understand why people keep giving Silicon Valley and techies in general such insane amounts of latitude despite how often they prove to be so fundamentally deceitful and even dangerous.

And the number of miles driven don't matter nearly as much as the degree of difficulty encountered in those miles.

As a lifelong surfer I'll use an analogy: someone who has spent 40 years surfing soft spots like Doheny, Cowell's, or Old Man's in San Onofre is nowhere near as competent as someone who's only been surfing 5-10 years and is already packing bombs at Pipeline.

When it comes to bot cars degree of difficulty is what matters most in testing.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> Look into the crap Anthony Levandowski pulled while still at Waymo that nearly killed a fellow engineer (he required multiple painful back surgeries). And just look at that lunatic in general.
> 
> I can't for the life of me understand why people keep giving Silicon Valley and techies in general such insane amounts of latitude despite how often they prove to be so fundamentally deceitful and even dangerous.


2 million Americans are injured / "nearly killed" in traffic accidents every year. Better one lunatic at a SDC company developing technology that obeys the road rules and occasionally injures an engineer, than hundred thousands of lunatics at the wheel injuring 5k regular people a day. Plus it sounds like the lunatic left the company so whats the problem.



Carbuncle said:


> And the number of miles driven don't matter nearly as much as the degree of difficulty encountered in those miles.


Nobody is saying SDCs should be approved for autonomy on the basis of mileage alone. Mileage does have a correlative function.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Carbuncle said:


> Uber initially falsified information about the woman they killed in AZ. And it's obvious they doctored the dashcam footage. Local drivers proved as much. That road is exceptionally well illuminated.
> 
> 
> True. But if they fixed all the roads and installed guidance beacons on lamp posts and under the asphalt it would make a HUGE difference in the performance of the AV's.


you act as if SDC's provide a benefit over a human driving their own car

there is literally no benefit of an SDC over myself driving my own car

i would never risk my life in one and im sure 99.99% of the people in the US feel the same exact way

if you required breathalyzers and driver-assist technology in every car you get rid of dui's and most accidents that occur

end of story

it's physically impossible for an SDC to be better than a human....and it's not even close

SDC's = deaths


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> 2 million Americans are injured / "nearly killed" in traffic accidents every year. Better one lunatic at a SDC company developing technology that obeys the road rules and occasionally injures an engineer, than hundred thousands of lunatics at the wheel injuring 5k regular people a day. Plus it sounds like the lunatic left the company so whats the problem.
> 
> Nobody is saying SDCs should be approved for autonomy on the basis of mileage alone. Mileage does have a correlative function.


You're not doing the right math.

And that's what these tech clowns count on.

Every single day over a billion cars are active on the world's roads, roads that are, for the most part, decayed and getting worse every day. By 2035 it's estimated that 2 billion cars will hit the roads every day.

When you run the numbers, and factor the dizzying range of variables, humans prove to be quite capable drivers. Consider that most human drivers receive very little skills and knowledge training and testing.

By comparison, the bot cars are logging vastly fewer miles (most of which are very friendly and not at all challenging) and proving to be significantly less capable.

When driving conditions get even a little challenging the bot cars are a disaster.

And you seem to think aliens are making these things.

Anything made by humans has human flaws baked into it.

Bot cars are vastly more complicated than any cell phone or laptop yet I don't know of any such device that doesn't have issues, issues that would prove fatal if lives were on the line.

Your view of these vehicles is much too romanticized. You need to come back to Earth.

Steve Wozniak has.



uberdriverfornow said:


> you act as if SDC's provide a benefit over a human driving their own car
> 
> there is literally no benefit of an SDC over myself driving my own car
> 
> ...


You're arguing with the wrong guy.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> Consider that most human drivers receive very little skills and knowledge training and testing.


I have, which is why I am pro SDC development. It takes 30 years to gain 30 years of experience for an individual driver, and that is precisely the problem.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> I have, which is why I am pro SDC development. It takes 30 years to gain 30 years of experience for an individual driver, and that is precisely the problem.


You're completely delusional.

These things will take 30-50 years to catch up to Black Cab drivers.


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> You're completely delusional.
> 
> These things will take 30-50 years to catch up to Black Cab drivers.


So even by your estimates, you admit the tech will eventually completely replace human drivers. 30-50 years is not that long in the grand scheme of things, and in the mean time SDCs can start by displacing lower skill tasks such as interstate driving on a clear day.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

badratings said:


> So even by your estimates, you admit the tech will eventually completely replace human drivers. 30-50 years is not that long in the grand scheme of things, and in the mean time SDCs can start by displacing lower skill tasks such as interstate driving on a clear day.


Not completely and certainty not at all if the infrastructure isn't completely overhauled.

Lots of ifs in that.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> I have, which is why I am pro SDC development. It takes 30 years to gain 30 years of experience for an individual driver, and that is precisely the problem.


robots can't learn....you're comparing apples to oranges again, tomato


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Even an oldy like W.O.P.R. learned to laugh.


{I wonder just how many other techno nerds there are here}


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

krbjmpr said:


> Even an oldy like W.O.P.R. learned to laugh.
> 
> {I wonder just how many other techno nerds there are here}


from war games


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> robots can't learn....you're comparing apples to oranges again, tomato


Ah yes, the conspiracy theorist also has no idea about how today's AI is developed. 
Machine learning is literally the process of setting the AI against a goal and letting it work out how to best achieve it through trial and error. I'm against this method because it is a shortcut with greater risks, but it is the prevailing method of developing advanced AI and it is working.
I personally prefer the method of programming where processes in the AI are better accounted for. In this process, the developer is learning from how the AI is performing and coding improvements into updates.
Either way, the effect is AI that improves over time, just like drivers, except the improvements can be installed in every new car instantly instead of through years of personal training and experience.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> Ah yes, the conspiracy theorist also has no idea about how today's AI is developed.
> Machine learning is literally the process of setting the AI against a goal and letting it work out how to best achieve it through trial and error. I'm against this method because it is a shortcut with greater risks, but it is the prevailing method of developing advanced AI and it is working.
> I personally prefer the method of programming where processes in the AI are better accounted for. In this process, the developer is learning from how the AI is performing and coding improvements into updates.
> Either way, the effect is AI that improves over time, just like drivers, except the improvements can be installed in every new car instantly instead of through years of personal training and experience.


the word you are looking for is "software"

it's the crazy conspiracy theorists that seem to think "AI" is a real living thing that is somehow going to come alive and be "self aware" and rule the world.....get real

i bet you believe there are "reptilians" living among us too

get real and come back to reality


----------



## badratings (Dec 24, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> the word you are looking for is "software"
> 
> it's the crazy conspiracy theorists that seem to think "AI" is a real living thing that is somehow going to come alive and be "self aware" and rule the world.....get real
> 
> ...


Nobody is saying AI isn't software.

Conspiracy theorist refers to your theory that every pro-SDC account is made by people from SDC companies.

You believe that AI can only get good at driving by becoming self aware, which is false. Most jobs, including driving, only require logic. People use emotion/instinct to accelerate decisions because our 20W, 1000cc brains are too slow to handle everything on its own, and precision suffers as a result. Think back to every time you did something on instinct, then imagine if you had unlimited time to assess the situation and make a rational decision. The principles that instincts function on can be converted into explicit instructions, then cleaned up.

You believe that building AI that is self aware is impossible (also false). While nobody can really prove that anyone or anything is truly self aware, AI can easily appear self aware, especially if they replicate sentient functions, or are developed in a process that has similarities to our own evolutionary process (random mutations leading to something that works, as opposed to each line of code having a specific purpose).


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> robots can't learn....you're comparing apples to oranges again, tomato


Ummm... you haven't been keeping up with the tech. They can learn. What they aren't capable of is creativity and plastic thinking.

Problem with AI is that it learns after it's made the mistake and it will apply the lesson to situations that are similar but not the same. That's a problem.



badratings said:


> Nobody is saying AI isn't software.
> 
> Conspiracy theorist refers to your theory that every pro-SDC account is made by people from SDC companies.
> 
> ...


This is wrong.

AI has not achieved nor is anywhere near plastic thought (creativity). AI is still only a very fast information processing system. It can "learn" from a mistake only by referencing the information it already possesses. AI does not have genuine intuition.

You also fail to understand how instinct works. Instinct is variable among all species. Some beings have much better instincts than others.

Even more comically you're conflating emotion with instinct. Seriously?

No project in human history is as ambitious as AV's. The environments they have to function almost flawlessly in are the most complex and varied systems in the human realm. Not even the best smart phones function at the levels AV's will need to and smart phones don't have the massive liability issues to contend with. Hell, not even the nav apps are functioning at the levels they should be.

Rushing bot cars to market will ensure fatalities and injuries and it won't take many of those for people to be scared off of them.

INFRASTRUCTURE. This has to be built out to augment performance. And this exposes the limits of private enterprise. The private sector cannot build out the necessary infrastructure, only government can coordinate that. The private sector has to pony up on the revenues needed to make that happen. Instead of torching tens to hundreds of billions in capital and revenue to attempt market dominance these tech companies need to be working with government agencies to design, fund, and build out the needed civil works.

Techies really should learn more about history because most of them keep repeating the same fatal mistakes that tear civilizations to the ground.

And AI will not have the capacity for plastic thought or genuine instinct until it becomes biomechanical and cybernetic. However, when that happens it's game over for humans. No truly sentient being with those capabilities will tolerate our existence.

I wouldn't.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

badratings said:


> Nobody is saying AI isn't software.
> 
> Conspiracy theorist refers to your theory that every pro-SDC account is made by people from SDC companies.
> 
> ...


because the only people that care about SDC's are the people that make money off of it

nobody else cares because there are no benefits whatsoever


----------



## CarpeNoctem (Sep 12, 2018)

Carbuncle said:


> Without the infrastructure it won't happen. And the regions you're mentioning have almost no market value for these vehicles. Empty roads and highways and suburban track home sprawl can't come anywhere near generating the necessary revenue to support these very costly fleets.
> 
> The fact that there's virtually no conversation being had about the infrastructural issues is proof enough of how delusional techies are being about all of this. They just don't grasp the intricacies of the real world dynamics involved.
> 
> ...


I agree with you for the most part. However, I believe the techies are the ones that fully realize the issues facing SDC's. Yes, there may be a couple of naive techs but if anyone really appreciates the issues, I would bet it is the techs wanting to slow things down. It is the bean counters that are wishing, propagandizing and pushing the rollout.

However, a few highly publicized, massive lawsuit accidents and the whole AV/SDC market could crumble - particularly when they happen to companies that are already in the red. Does anyone think Uber could shoulder something like the 737 Max problems? This is AV tech in airplanes. Can anyone imagine a fatal bug in tens of millions of cars nationwide? Or, for that matter, having all those SDC's off the road while the NTSB investigates?

Now, if we get to a mass transportation like scenario where it is not really driving (imagine the kiddie cars with rails or slot cars) with all vehicles controlled by a metro wide computer system, then yes, I can see an advantage to that system and the banning of human drivers on the public roads.


----------



## Carbuncle (Mar 29, 2019)

CarpeNoctem said:


> I agree with you for the most part. However, I believe the techies are the ones that fully realize the issues facing SDC's. Yes, there may be a couple of naive techs but if anyone really appreciates the issues, I would bet it is the techs wanting to slow things down. It is the bean counters that are wishing, propagandizing and pushing the rollout.
> 
> However, a few highly publicized, massive lawsuit accidents and the whole AV/SDC market could crumble - particularly when they happen to companies that are already in the red. Does anyone think Uber could shoulder something like the 737 Max problems? This is AV tech in airplanes. Can anyone imagine a fatal bug in tens of millions of cars nationwide? Or, for that matter, having all those SDC's off the road while the NTSB investigates?
> 
> Now, if we get to a mass transportation like scenario where it is not really driving (imagine the kiddie cars with rails or slot cars) with all vehicles controlled by a metro wide computer system, then yes, I can see an advantage to that system and the banning of human drivers on the public roads.


I've given numerous rides to AV engineers from several companies. I'm pretty fearless in my conversations and the same thing repeatedly reveals itself: these guys are in waaaaaay over their heads. The variables they're ignoring are off the charts and none of them think infrastructural overhauls are necessary. They're also some of the most arrogant people I've ever met. Hubris never ends well.


----------

