theguardian.com
I'm trying not to be too smug about the guy dying, but when will you idiots ever learn? I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots, trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
Musk is a fucking fraud, and is going to be exposed as the next Enron. Anyone naive enough to give Tela their money deserves to be robbed. I just can't wait for the lawsuits to begin.
Other urls found in this thread:
waitbutwhy.com
arstechnica.com
youtube.com
teslamotors.com
yahoo.com
businessinsider.com
twitter.com
Did he even read the Terms of Service? It CLEARLY says that the auto pilot doesn't work and you will die if you use it!! What a retard, amirite??? :D:D:D
>a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion
LOL please explain this one
What's the difference between a Tesla and a gun? A Tesla is an inanimate object that can decide to kill you.
>I'm trying not to be too smug about the guy dying, but when will you idiots ever learn? I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots, trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
First of all this isn't "AI"
Second, autopilot can't replicate human drivers because a car crashed? Are you a retard? If they wanted to replicate human drivers they would be crashing more often than this so far.
40,000 car deaths a year in America.
Like 75% is due to wrong turns.
AI driver won't know that you're supposed to speed up to get along side of anyone that cuts you off so you can give them the finger
It's basically cruise control.
Tesla's bringing trouble calling it auto pilot.
>Musk is a fucking fraud
No he isn't
He said this isn't a truly autonomous car and driver input is required, he warned everyone about exactly this
True
Humans still beat automation on fatalities per distance travelled
It's still safer even now than human drivers. You have no point.
And before someone comes yelling "this is not about muh politics...." No, trying to take away all your last human freedoms to where your car drives itself, all you financial info is put onto a ship that will be injected under your skin (and, of course, which can also keep track of your every move).
But hey, isn't all of this great? So long s you aren't a criminal, like why fo you care if the OWG, NWO knows evert step you take?
What is the use of this feature besides cruise control, which already exists?
>AI for cars can never drive as well as a human
Yes OP, AI has reached the ceiling of its potential. Visual learning is only 2 years old and applications can now be shown an image and describe it with a sentence but AI is now at its peak it'll never surpass humans.
Just my speculating of how much of an unimaginative dullard you'd have to be to believe that and what they might say.
Emotion is the wrong word, but no one is as stupid as a highly educated and nominally intelligent person who sets rules based on currently available data -- and then walks away. The functional premise of autonomous cars is magically predicting the future.
Basically advanced cruise control
You can get on the highway and it will change lanes, slow and speed up, etc, but you still have to pay attention.
Not disagreeing with you but what parts of a human being do you think could never be artificially replicated by technology assuming technology will inevitably advance way further than we can imagine today
>One automated car crashes and kills someone
"Oh my gawd! Automated cars are evil! They will never work, ban them forever!
>Several cars have crashed and killed people all around the world in the past hour.
"cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion"
On a mass scale, I do think automated cars will be safer for the public than personal driven cars.
hurr durr let's ban AI development
good
I can't drive
(Legally blind)
I for one welcome our self driving car overlords
AI will kill us all
Just saying
hope your AI overlord kills you so you don't pass on those weak genes famalam :^)
same way as humans want to behead you stupid
People crash all the fucking time.
>we could never replicate the safety and skill of a human driver!
1 computer assisted car crash.
>CAR MURDER! AR15's ARE SAFER! JEW FRAUDS!
Sup Forums is always full of retard logic, but this thread is particularly ripe.
worked for star trek.
>it will do all of these things that allow you to pay less attention
>but you still have to pay the same amount of attention that you would if it did not
Holy shit its like I'm in Israel. That is the most jewish rationale for a useless feature I have ever read.
technology will fix genes or dna anomalies
>LOL please explain this one
OK, as you wish:
>if one sees a high school girl clearly uncomfortable at the wheel, you keep away from her.
>An old man who is going slow and clearly has vision problems (based on observing his glasses), at a 4 way stop you let him go even if not there first
>a woman with a lot of children in the car (rare these days for White families), you give more pace and give the right of way even if they don't have it just to prevent drama
I can think of 100 examples mate...
yeah an d the cheapest and most efficient way to do that is eliminating faulty gen lines.
Probably all of them but the complexity of the brain makes replicating it with electronics a difficult task (for future people).
>Useless feature
That's laughable considering the things Germans pass off as "features"
If its genetics how come nobody else in my entire family has this eye disease?
It's a more advanced cruise control, if you try to use it like they do in a Simpsons episode you deserve whatever happens to you.
What kind of non sequiter is this? I am not a german. Freedom aint free.
How do you quantify the appropriate amount of attention to remove from driving with this feature? Can you not worry about paying attention when its time to make a turn, because this does it for you?
If you have to pay the EXACT same amount of attention to survive, what is the fucking point?
Stop using diversionary rhetoric and explain exactly how this meaningfully impacts the way you should be behave in a car.
You can prove it to yourself. Next time you want to cut into a line of traffic look the other driver directly in the eye. They will let you.
Fail to look them in the eye and they will block most likely block you.
130 million miles driven my Tesla autopilot. 1 fatality.
Human drivers normally manage 90 million miles between fatalities.
Musk's merry band of mad engineers are combing over the data. Looks like the autopilot mistook the trailer for a overhead sign.
Cool thing about AI, it will only ever make a mistake once. The AI will be fixed. Hopefully it will be a lot longer than 130 million miles before the next one.
>That is the most jewish rationale for a useless feature I have ever read.
Oi vey goyim, it's like the "Hyperloop!" you're not meant to ask reasonable questions--like what if someone has to take a piss-- just keep up the hype and drive share prices up so Musk can sell when his shares hit their peak and leave all his goy workers with no retirement shekels.
Fuck if I know I wouldn't bother with the thing.
pic related not tesla car
I'm not calling you german you weirdly defensive person.
It just seems odd to attack one of the few genuinely impressive and useful features but not anything else
Having cars with a self driving OPTION isn't bad... It's if they tried to make it self-drive only that there's a problem.
Aren't those the cars that burst into flames?
>130 million miles
with a human the wheel
the first time a guy tried falling asleep and letting the AI drive he ended up dead
Its odd to make posts relevant to the thread topic when germany exists? lmao
>trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers
Yes it can, it will eventually. Tesla's assist feature was never meant to be a 100% autonomous drive with your eyes closed feature. It was never that advanced. But a superior version that makes little to no mistakes will eventually be built.
As sensors improve and the computers that are tasked to make out what the sensors are relaying to it and act accordingly improve, it will be a superior driver to humans.
>ood deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
Tell me how does emotion make you a better driver?
It's freaky to admit but computers will surpass everything we are capable of doing within our lifetime. Within our lifetime we will create that artificial intelligence. We will literally render ourselves obsolete.
Anyways if you're into this kind of shit I recommend reading this
waitbutwhy.com
If you are a bit of a pessimist I advise you to think twice before reading it. I consider myself an optimist and even I got a little anxiety and depression for a few days after reading that. Anyways that article can be summed up with pic related, we are close to experiencing it lads.
What does that post even mean?
>Cool thing about AI, it will only ever make a mistake once.
Wild guess--- you are an Indian/"Asian" and a STEM, correct?
I've seen this difference between Whites and other races as I travel for my job. You can give a White those odds, and yet he'd still (rightfully so) rather drive himself simply because he HAS CONTROL. I think it's something in you nature that you cannot seem to get it, same way Amerian are about guns and others just can't understand-- would rather take the greater odds of a car crash so long as we get to be in controlt he entire time and if it turns out our abilities aren't good enough at the moment of truth, so be it, but at least we were in control until the end.
Is that based more on emotion than logic? Yes, and it will still win out every time.
t. yank in UK enjoying the hell out of my dollar being worth so much
I dont even trust my chevy malibu electronic shit why? Because corporate software is made by 3rd world indian shitskins programmers.
Teslas have driven billions of miles.
They have gone over 130 million on pure autopilot.
This driver was an enthusiast who posted multiple YouTube videos showing his Tesla's autopilot avoiding multiple accidents by other drivers.
yep this guy get it
>use auto control
>get killed automatically
>human programmers
what could possibly go wrong
This.
Flaws with the AI are a engineering issue then once solved all cars will be updated.
Flaws in human driving are legal issues and are only there as a deterrent and punished after-the-fact when an accident happens.
Frankly this technology isn't ready. When Tesla and others make "fully autonomous" not this "autopilot" shit then we'll be talking.
Until then, people will not compete. We used to put our lives in the hands of horses on the road. Those were replaced with human drivers and finally humans will be replaced by machines.
I support this with dishwashers, washer/dryers and all of the other machines that reduce my labor and increase safety.
The Luddites on this board can fuck off. They know nothing of technology and they vastly overestimate their abilities as drivers.
>self driving OPTION isn't bad
But mate, it could never work this way...imagine...a ride at 6 flags or a water park where some people controlled their own speed and did their own steering, whereas others were computerized.
The only way it could ever work is if, overnight, ALL cars on the road switched over to such a system where they would be able to communicate with one another and adjust speed and steering accordingly.
>a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
ape humans cant stop technology no worries bro :)
>You can give a White those odds, and yet he'd still (rightfully so) rather drive himself simply because he HAS CONTROL.
then a drunk driver hits you, kills you and your "control" means dogshit.
>internet of things
>security
pick one and only one
arstechnica.com
>that graph
Please provide units for the Y axis :^)
oh shit that ID
auto-pilot cars dont get drunk
Nah I'm just a Turkish dude, if you consider that "Asian". Not in STEM tho.
I would personally pick the option that is more safe, and that is ultimately autonomous vehicles. I honestly feel no need 'in being control of my car' because my car is merely a utility.
Like I feel no need no be in control of my elevator other than set the floor is goes to, no need to be in control of the flights I fly in.
But I do like taking my car for a spin around the track, that's just a hobby thought and I'll maintain that hobby even if autonomous cars come. But I couldn't give a fuck about being in control of my car when in bumper to bumper traffic going to work, rather would have the car handle that.
reminder AI cars don't have to be perfect drivers, they just have to get in less accidents than a normal human
gud id
I completely agree with you here friend. I think the entire "internet of things" will, in 90% of cases, be both insecure and ineffective.
I just hope the Jews don't start a Third World War before I get to see Musk go bankrupt.
Yep. But we don't respect emotions
in'shallah
this, pic related
AI cant get drunk, so thats 50% less accidents already
...
Tfw trump loses
> TSLA 216.50
Yeah it just has a potato brain that shuts off constantly. The cameras didn't know the sun from a white trailer. Kid lost his ball in the street? You brake. Hail? You brake. Similar shapes though eh. Cat? Dog? Brake. Frogs? Run em over
can the man in your pic die in an accident? I'm so disgusted.
has there ever been a mile travelled without intervention? I mean, in this case the car was able to travel by itself, but usually people don't let it since it's against the disclaimer!
thats why all cars must have auto pilot connected with each other to avoid crashes
of topic
who is fault in pic related
That's why you haven't learned anything and you wanna just drive goyim off a mountain
"AI" does not exist
Google's cars drive without intervention. They drive very slowly.
The vast majority of all autonomous concept cars have no steering wheels or no one in the driver's seat and drive by themselves.
R A R E
A
R
E
Who's at fault? Who knows. But one thing was for sure is that three people were "in control".
yeah, to cover his ass
So many people here have no idea what self driving is and what auto pilot is.
Watch this please:
youtube.com
These cars won't need to be connected to each other. They can act independently, and have to be better than the top 1% of human drivers.
Neural nets can read road signs better than any person alive. Hell you are filling a captcha that was labelled by a neural net.
hundreds, if not thousands of miles by now.
some user mentioned this before, but the point is the program will be fixed and that program will not make the same mistake again. The programming that supports self driving cars is only going to evolve and become better from here.
no its not
>This is the first known fatality in just over 130 million miles where Autopilot was activated.
>Among all vehicles in the US, there is a fatality every 94 million miles.
>Worldwide, there is a fatality approximately every 60 million miles.
Read more here faggots: teslamotors.com
its clear ,the red car was stoping the transit, even the poor guy in the jeep had to cross on the top of the red car so he could continue is journey .
Someone actually cares when this technology fails. The man's life insurance will pay, Tesla will make a settlement and engineers will scramble to fix the issue permanently.
When a person usually dies in an accident, nothing fucking happens. Every says "aww, how sad" or "wow, they were stupid" and the person gets buried and nothing changes. This is different. All of these accidents will be taken very personally by many people involved and engineered until they won't happen again.
>Google's cars drive without intervention. They drive very slowly.
I believe the Google car can make a trip by itself. When the collision with the bus occured, the driver said he didn't intervene because he thought the bus driver would stop.
>"When the light turned green, traffic in the lane continued past the Google AV," Google officials wrote in the report. "After a few cars had passed, the Google AV began to proceed back into the center of the lane to pass the sand bags. A public transit bus was approaching from behind. The Google AV test driver saw the bus approaching in the left side mirror but believed the bus would stop or slow to allow the Google AV to continue.
yahoo.com
>hundreds, if not thousands of miles by now.
You have to consider the times when a test driver has intervened. It's pretty much like letting a learning driver behind the wheel - there will be less accidents when it's supervised.
In that case, the car was fully autonomous. What you read was merely the opinion of the passenger/researcher.
>there will be less accidents when it's supervised.
lol, no.
Tesla is the Apple of cars
N E W
E
W
And he was watching HARRY POTTER too! Wew boy what a cuck.
>Musk is a fucking fraud
according to what exactly
Thank you. It's your bedtime now.
The car was fully autonomous. It crashed because the driver did not stop the car.
>If the driver would have stopped the car, there would not have been an accident.
