this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
82 points (100.0% liked)

196

16484 readers
2402 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

KICK TECH BROS OUT OF 196

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I think literally all those things are scenarios that a driving AI would be able to measure and heuristically say, "in scenarios like this that were in my training set, these are what often follows." Like, do you think the training set has no instances of people pulling out of blind spots illegally? Of course that's a scenario the model would have been trained on.

And secondarily, those are all scenarios that "real intelligences" fail on very very regularly, so saying AI isn't a real intelligence because it might fail in those scenarios doesn't logically follow.

But I think what you are trying to argue is that AI drivers aren't as good as an "actual intelligence" driver, which is immaterial to the point I'm making, and is ultimately super quantifiable. As the data comes in we will know in a very objective way if an AI driver is safer on average than a human. That's quantifiable. But regardless of the answer, it has no bearing on if the AI is in fact "intelligent" or not. Blind people are intelligent, but I don't want a blind person driving me around either.