this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
249 points (94.3% liked)

Technology

59207 readers
4238 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Victim in critical condition

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I've read about the cruse team, and "extremely casual attitude to product testing" does not accurately describe what they are doing. The cruse vehicles have a much lower and less severe accident rating than human drivers, and have logged millions of road miles without seriously injuring anyone (until now).

Unlike a certain narcissistic auto manufacturers owner...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Oh, did they actually release data and had an independent research group analyse it? Or is this a statement from their PR department? It's easy to be better than the average human driver if you only drive in good weather and well built roads.

Tesla always makes big claims about how safe it is, but to the best of my knowledge never actually released any usable data about it. It would be awesome if cruise did that.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

'Less shit than the average human at it' is a really low bar to set for modern computers, even if Tesla fails at that poor standard and Cruise is currently top of the game. We still need much higher bars when we're talking about entirely automated systems which are controlling speedy large chunks of metal, or even other smaller-scale-impact-and-damage systems. Systems which can't just hop out, ask if the victims are OK, render appropriate first aid, accurately inform emergency services, etc.

The more automation, the higher the standards should be, which means we need to set legal requirements that at least try to scale with he development of technology.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I disagree. Human drivers kill over 40,000 Americans a year. If there’s an alternative that kills less than 40,000 a year we should take it. Ideally mass transit but America seems to like cars.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I wasn't suggesting stopping the development of automated vehicles because it's impossible to have 0 damage. I was advocating having high standards for software/hardware development and real consequences for decision-makers trying to find shortcuts.

Progress and standards are not mutually exclusive.