The incident in northern California marked the latest mishap blamed on the electric vehicle company’s Autopilot tech
Musk did prove he doesn’t know what a train is
Removed
The Autopilot was in TRAINing mode
And it has a great TRACK record in training mode.
It certainly was CHUGGING ALONG nicelly.
Not surprising, considering Tesla autopilot sees trains as a bunch of semis bumper to bumper.
The locomotives yearn for the tracks
Further proof that America needs to invest in electrified rail
All the “self driving” cars are trying to evolve into proper trams and railways
This is that “AI” that investors keep jerking themselves purple over.
Real “Self driving cars” will not be available in our lifetimes.
I don’t believe that. Based on how far AI has come in the recent years I think it’s only a matter of time before someone (other than Tesla) manages to do it well.
The biggest problem with the Tesla Auto pilot is Elon. Just the fact that he insists on using only camera-based vision because “people only need their eyes to drive” should tell you all you need to know about their AI.
And you believe and think that why? Most of us criticizing do that, because we have some idea what machine learning is and what it simply doesn’t solve. It’s not a hard to get knowledge.
I think it’s unreasonable to state that it won’t happen within our lifetime. That’s hopefully 60+ years away for me. It’s a long time for computing and general AI development to advance. Just look at how much has happened in the technology field for the past 30 years.
“It always seems impossible until it’s done.” - Nelson Mandela
Sorry, but this is again abstractions and philosophy, in the genre of Steve Jobs themed motivational texts. Which I hate with boredom (get tired quickly of hating with passion).
Many things have been called “AI” and many will be. I’m certain some will bring very important change. And those may even use ML somewhere. For classification and clustering parts most likely, and maybe even extrapolation, but that’d be subject to a system of symbolic logic working above them at least, and they’ll have to find a way of adding entropy.
What they call “AI” now definitely won’t. Fundamentally.
“It always seems impossible until it’s done.” - Nelson Mandela
Quoting that one guy who hasn’t been hanged\shot\beheaded while many many many more other people trying the same have been. Survivor’s error and such.
Innovators and visionaries is what drives us forward. If they listened all the nay-sayers we would get nowhere. I will keep being optimistic about the future developments of technology.
Innovators and visionaries is what drives us forward. If they listened all the nay-sayers we would get nowhere.
How can you not see that these sentences say nothing?
What’s “forward”? From Hypercard and Genera times to today is “forward”?
Who are “innovators and visionaries”? I mean, that’d be many people, but no Steve Jobs in the list, if that’s what made you write this.
Who are “nay-sayers”? If that’s, say, Richard Stallman, then all his nays on technology (as it happens, he’s kinda weird on other things) were correct.
And the final question, why do you think you can in any way feel the wind of change, when you don’t know the fundamental basics of the area of human knowledge where you “believe” in it? Don’t you think it’s not wind of change, it’s just usual marketing for clueless people?
Say, I see a lot of promising and wonderful things, but people not knowing fundamentals get excited over something stupid which is being advertised to them.
Blue LED-lights, the TV, radio, airplanes, the personal computer, the light bulb, nuclear fission, optical microscopes, shooting lasers for an aptosecond are among some thing previously thought to be impossible to do.
Who said anything about Steve Jobs? I never mentioned anyone specific and as you say, there are many people that would make that list.
I would consider the “experts” and laymen with a sceptical attitude towards innovation to be nay-sayers.
I think it’s weird how so many people suddenly became experts on AI as soon as OpenAI released ChatGPT.
I don’t like the current trend of companies putting half-assed AI in to everything. AI is the new buzzword to bring in hype. But that doesn’t mean I can not see the value it can potentially bring in the future once it’s more developed. The developments within the AI-field has only just begun.
My use of the word AI is very broad. I am not saying that ChatGPT could drive a car. But I 100% believe that we will have self-driving cars before I die of old age.
They don’t have to be any good, they just have to be significantly better than humans. Right now they’re… probably about average, there’s plenty of drunk or stupid humans bringing the average down.
It’s true that isn’t good enough, unlike humans, self driving cars are will be judged together, so people will focus on their dumbest antics, but once their average is significantly better than human average, that will start to overrule the individual examples.
Right now they are not that at all.
When people say neural nets are unable to reason, they don’t mean something fuzzy-cloudy like normies do, which can be rebutted by some other fuzzy-cloudy stuff. They literally mean that neural nets are unable to reason. They are not capable of logic.
Reasoning is obviously useful, not convinced it’s required to be a good driver. In fact most driving decisions must be done rapidly, I doubt humans can be described as “reasoning” when we’re just reacting to events. Decisions that take long enough could be handed to a human (“should we rush for the ferry, or divert for the bridge?”). It’s only the middling bit between where we will maintain this big advantage (“that truck ahead is bouncing around, I don’t like how the load is secured so I’m going to back off”). that’s a big advantage, but how much of our time is spent with our minds fully focused and engaged anyway? Once we’re on autopilot, is there much reasoning going on?
Not that I think this will be quick, I expect at least another couple of decades before self driving cars can even start to compete with us outside of specific curated situations. And once they do they’ll continue to fuck up royally whenever the situation is weird and outside their training, causing big news stories. The key question will be whether they can compete with humans on average by outperforming us in quick responses and in consistently not getting distracted/tired/drunk.
self-driving vehicles have existed for decades, and they are very safe.
They are trains 🚊 / trams 🚋
Trams and trains have drivers.
not all of them
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_train_systems
I can afford to have a driver if I’m splitting the cost with 400 of my closest friends.
Subways not trains/trams, which makes sense since they are in a mostly closed system. The French one is closed off and doors slide open on the dock so that passengers can board the cars. This particular system also runs on pneumatic wheels on a rail. I guess for easier accuracy with braking/acceleration?
We-ell, there have been bugs causing train collisions, but there also have been train collisions caused by machinist’s error or some other misfortune, so.
Now AI may or may not be overhyped but Tesla’s self-driving nonsense isn’t AI regardless. Just pattern recognition it is not the neural net everyone assumes it is.
It really shouldn’t be legal, this tech will never work because it doesn’t include lidar so it lacks depth perception. Of course humans also don’t have lidar, but we have depth perception built in thanks billions of years of evolution. But computers don’t do too well with stereoscopic vision for 3D calculations, and really can do with actual depth information being provided to them.
If you lack depth perception, and higher reasoning skills, for a moment you might actually think that a train driving past you is a road. 3D perception would have told the software that the train was vertical and not horizontal, and thus was a barrier and not a driving surface.
Just pattern recognition it is not the neural net everyone assumes it is.
Tesla’s current iteration of self-driving is based on neural networks. Certainly the computer vision is; there’s no other way we have of doing computer vision that works at all well and, according to this article from last year it’s true for the decision-making too.
Of course, the whole task of self-driving is “pattern recognition”; neural networks are just one way of achieving that.
We have gone from cruise control to cars being able to drive themselves quite well in about a decade. The last percentage points of reliability are of course the hardest, but that’s a tremendously pessimistic take.
Someone accidentally included Back to the Future 3 footage in the training data.
But only the very last scene
“Where we’re going, we don’t need tracks”
Aww, it want to be train, let it be train.
How cute, it trainsitioned
TRAINSITIONED, CORAL
Choo Choo! Morherfuckers!!
This sounds like a metaphor for Elon endorsing Trump.
Roads really need a standard for sensors specifically for autopilots.
GPS and cameras reading lines, signs ,and lights aren’t good.
Yeah, like a digital “ideal line” that the cars can follow.
Maybe even a physical guiding line.
We could even connect all the cars via WLAN (WiFi) to exchange info when they are braking and accelerating. That would increase efficiency.
Maybe we could even connect them physically to have a stronger engine pulling more cars more efficiently.
If we already have an ideal guiding line, we might actually save some asphalt and make the roads more optimised. Use different materials so the tyre particles don’t pollute as much.
Ah, let’s just build a train.
Or just fund public transportation instead :)
Autopilot buses could use this too.
Or just buld a tram that rides on rails. More effecient and no need to over engineer an autopilot system
You have to lay tracks for a tram though, means changing the route isn’t that easy. Self-Driving buses would actually be more efficient since you could alter the route on a hourly basis if you wanted optimized by traffic and destinations required.
All that could be easily automated, but you lose that if you have a physical track you have to run along.
Eventually a great idea, but that’s not rolling out particularly soon.
I don’t want to waste any more tax money trying to make one of the least effecient modes of transport more autonomous. Just build an electricrfied tram if thats what you want.
The United States is simply too large and distributed for everyone to use public transportation. It will never happen, so get used to it and try to optimize what will be part of our future.
The majority of trips people make are within their own city/local region. Thats where transit should be implemented first. Your country is not “too big” for transit
If your country is too big for transit, it is certainly too big for all sorts of sensors and such in the roads to assist autonmous driving.
It is too distributed in too many places for mass transit. The religious fervor over the fuck cars movement is not going to get people in highly populated, low density areas to walk a mile to catch a bus to catch a train full of homeless people to catch another bus to walk a half mile to their destination, when they could have completed that same journey in the comfort of their own car in 1/4 of the time.
Take Dallas for instance. I’m not going to do the work for you, but feel free to plan a trip from a random house in Allen, TX to a business 5-10+ miles away using both the public transit system and then a car. No one sane with limited time in their day is opting for the public transit option. And this is in a city with a decent passenger rail system.
All of those issues could be fixed by building around transit being the prioirty instead of the car. Some cities actually have transit that is faster than a car because transit gets priority at intersections and can take a more direct route.
I’m open to ideas. Show me an example of it.
The new york city subway is often faster than driving. Many cities in the Netherlands have faster transit or cycling times than driving due to careful planning and priority. Japan has high speed rail connecting many of its cities, most trains going faste than highway speeds, some doubling or even tripling highway speeds.
Also north america was founded on trains. If we could build trains 100 years ago we can build better ones now.
Isn’t it the responsibility of the driver during autopilot?
Hello Tesla PR department.
I just don’t understand how someone can read all the warnings, get a driver’s license (implying their knowledge of the rules of the road) and presumably have years of driving experience and magically think it’s ok to just stop paying attention.
It doesn’t matter if the car fully promotes itself as self driving, it doesn’t matter if the laws surrounding it still require you to be present and in control.
It’s no different than 1000hp cars, just because the car is marketed as such, doesn’t magically make it legal to go 200mph.
You don’t understand why people would think that a feature called “full self-driving” is capable of fully driving the car itself?
Anyone who agree’s to this warning, and thinks the car is capable of fully driving themselves, is an idiot
"Full Self-Driving is in early limited access Beta and must be used with additional caution. It may do the wrong thing at the worst time, so you must always keep your hands on the wheel and pay extra attention to the road. Do not become complacent. … Use Full Self-Driving in limited Beta only if you will pay constant attention to the road, and be prepared to act immediately …
Now, I don’t know if that warning exists after it became Full Self Driving (Supervised) when V12.X became a thing and he gave free demo’s to everyone, but at that point its name literally includes SUPERVISED, so really, they’re idiots either way.
I wish. I bet they’d pay bank.
Human drivers have done this before. Navigation system says “turn right”, they don’t realise it means after the level crossing.
I think it’s every responsible driver’s duty not to buy a Tesla!
News tomorrow: Police department retracts statement after Elon Musk lawsuit
Hyperloop 2.0
It’s exceptionally unlikely that AUTOPILOT did this.
AP only follows the lane/road you’re in.
Maybe it was FSD, but this is terrible reporting.
A perfect example of why calling it autopilot in the first place was a bad idea. The name misrepresents the feature, which is really just lane keeping and a few other minor things.
The name does not misrepresent the feature, and has been used accordingly in aviation for decades.
Yes, because the general public are aviation experts.
I feel like driver assist is a better representation of what this feature is.
Gps autopilot on sail boats has been around for a long time now(not talking about windvane selfsteering) and it will keep course via the rudder, but if the wind changes it won’t shift the sails so you still have to keep watch and either change the sails, or change course to follow the wind.
If you don’t pay attention and the wind changes the sails start flapping and shit can get messy.The point is that while car autopilot does match the definition of nautical autopilot and how it funtions(it needs human oversight) I would never expect someone who’s never gone sailing with an autopilot device being used to know how it works and that someone needs to watch it and why. It’s niche knowledge and kinda foolish to expect people to just know stuff like that.
I don’t expect random people to know, but the media who’s reporting on it? Yes, I do expect that, and it’s terrible reporting when they get it wrong. It just continues to spread incorrect information, which gets further turned into misinformation.
Also anyone who actually activates it in the car goes through the little how it works and what it’s short falls are. If they didn’t know prior, they’ll know then, just like with boaters who learn how it works and what it’s shortfalls are.
