The crash happened because the human failed to intervene and because the computer, which clearly detected the need for breaking seconds before, wasn’t allowed to intervene (by humans). Let that sink in for a second.https://twitter.com/wsj/status/999653002863693824 …
Slowing down sometimes it is just enough to save someone. I don’t care for autonomous driving, I care for aids that help in emergency situations. Technology certainly helps in that regard (ABS, airbags) and rarely make things worse.
-
-
When things go wrong, and assisted driving technology is involved, we always forget about what would have happened if only the human driver would have been there. Typically the the answer is exactly the same or worse. Certain tech inspires less attention, and that is an issue...
-
...but this was a driver specifically hired to test systems and therefore should had expectations of errors/situations happening at any given time.
-
She was just out of jail and did not have any special qualification/skill. My impression is that this kind of people are the perfect scapegoats for those corps. And the fact that the braking system was disabled can be assessed independently?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Absolutely true, but announcing a better ABS etc. would not make stock price rise, that is the issue. I see companies porsuing fully autonomous driving when there is plenty of potential to improve "traditional" one.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.