• dsemy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    You don’t understand why people on Lemmy, an alternative platform not controlled by corporations, might not want to get in a car literally controlled by a corporation?

    I can easily see a future where your car locks you in and drives you to a police station if you do something “bad”.

    As to their safety, I don’t think there are enough AVs to really judge this yet; of course Cruise’s website will claim Cruise AVs cause less accidents.

    • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can imagine in the future there will be grid locks in front of the police station with AV cars full of black people when the cops send out an ABP with the description of a black suspect.

      We’ve seen plenty of racist AI programs in the past because the programmers, intentionally or not, added their own bias into the training data.

      • lol3droflxp@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Any dataset sourced from human activity (eg internet text as in Chat GPT) will always contain the current societal bias.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The AIs are not racist themselves, it’s a side effect of the full technology stack: cameras have lower dynamic resolution for darker colors, images get encoded with a gamma that leaves less information in darker areas, AIs that work fine with images of light skinned faces, don’t get the same amount of information from images of dark skinned faces, leading to higher uncertainty and more false positives.

        The bias starts with cameras themselves; security cameras in particular should have an even higher dynamic range than the human eye, but instead they’re often a cheap afterthought, and then go figure out what have they recorded.

    • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re putting words to my mouth. I wasn’t talking about people on Lemmy not wanting to get into one of these vehicles.

      The people here don’t seem to want anyone getting into these vehicles. Many here are advocating for all-out ban on self-driving cars and demand that they’re polished to near perfection on closed roads before being allowed for public use even when the little statistics we already have mostly seem to indicate these are at worst as good as human drivers.

      If it’s about Teslas the complain often is the lack of LiDAR and radars and when it’s about Cruise which has both it’s then apparently about corruption. In both cases the reaction tends to be mostly emotional and that’s why every time one provides statistics to back up the claims about safety it just gets called marketing bullshit.

      • dsemy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly? I don’t want anyone to use AVs because I fear they will become popular enough that eventually I’ll be required to use one.

        I honestly haven’t done enough research on AV safety to feel comfortable claiming anything concrete about it. I personally don’t feel comfortable with it yet since the technology is very new and I essentially need to trust it with my life. Maybe in a few years I’ll be more convinced.

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I hear you. I love driving and I have zero interest in buying a self-driving vehicle. However I can still stand outside my own preferences and look at it objectively enough to see that it’s just a matter of time untill AI gets so good at it that it could be considered irresponsible to let a human drive. I don’t like it but that’s progress.

        • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Travelling in a community whose public roads require 100% AVs will probably be the safest implementation of driving, period. But if you don’t trust the tech, then just don’t live or travel in that community.

          I suspect we’ll see an AV only lane on the hwy soon, and people will realize how much faster you can get through traffic without tailgaters and lane weavers constantly causing micro inefficiencies at best, and wrecks at worst.

          • jarfil@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            When vehicle-to-vehicle communication improves, and gets standardized, it will be interesting to see “AV road trains” of them going almost bumper to bumper, speeding up and slowing down all at the same time.

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Autonomous driving isn’t necessarily controlled by a corporation any more than your PC is. Sure, the earliest computers were all built and run by corporations and governments, but today we all enjoy (the choice of) computing autonomy because of those innovations.

      I can be pro AV and EV without being pro corporate control over the industries. It’s a fallacy to conflate the two.

      The fact is that letting humans drive in a world with AVs is like letting humans manually manage database entries in a world with MySQL. And the biggest difficulty is that we’re trying to live in a world where both humans and computers are “working out of the same database at the same time”. That’s a much more difficult problem to solve than just having robots do it all.

      I still have a gas powered manual that I love driving, but I welcome the advancement in EV/AV technology, and am ready to adopt it as soon as sufficient open standards and repairability can be offered for them.