• SuperIce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    49
    ·
    9 months ago

    This autonomous “murderbot” is way less likely to injure or kill someone than a vehicle operated by a human.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Maybe one day, but they aren’t safer yet. In fact they aren’t even driverless yet, but somehow they’re immune to prosecution nonetheless. IMO they’re tech bubble nonsense, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they disappear soon, now that the cheap money party is over.

      GM Halving Spending On Cruise Self-Driving Cars In 2024, Report Says—Will ‘Relaunch And Refocus’ Unit

      Cruise’s October accident in San Francisco—in which the company was accused of “telling a half truth” regarding its responsibility—prompted investigations into the company and its response and led to the California Department of Motor Vehicles suspending its license to operate in the state.

      • SuperIce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        9 months ago

        The Cruise autos are definitely garbage and dangerous at the moment, but what about Waymos, like the one that was burnt down?

          • Akisamb@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            You can’t take one accident and use that to generalize.

            You need to take into account all accidents and see how worse humans are.

            https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/12/human-drivers-crash-a-lot-more-than-waymos-software-data-shows/

            Cars are naturally dangerous. A robot car is going to have deaths no matter what. That does not mean they are bad if they mean a reduction of cars and accidents. Taxis if done properly can help a public transport system.

            • taladar@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Most automated driving companies chose fair weather cities for their tests for a reason. Sure, if you include all human drivers driving in a blizzard at night on a curvy mountain road you get more crashes than AI drivers on sunny, bright days on wide, open city streets but that is not a fair comparison.

              • Akisamb@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                9 months ago

                I don’t agree. Curvy roads are dangerous, but there are much more conflicts in cities. You’re not going to have many pedestrians in curvy mountain roads.

                That said, you are right that the ideal comparison would be int the same city. But I’m not sure that the data exists, I’ll have to look this afternoon.

                That said, even if my data is not perfect, it’s much better than taking one accident and saying that self driving cars are dangerous. They are not going to be magically better than humans, after all driving is a difficult task, but we should at least crunch the numbers before dismissing them.

          • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            9 months ago

            I am not pro car, I am very much pro AI though

            At one point, calculators were worse than humans at the same job. All it took was time and money and now I think everyone can agree we’re better off not having to wait 20+ minutes to get a quadratic equation solved.

              • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                No, I use a calculator. My point was that technologies that suck now get better as they age.

                • pedz@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  It mostly sucks ungodly amounts of electricity for a mediocre result. And I don’t think the energy consumed for things like driving a two ton vehicle around, when people can take a bus or a train, is worth it.

    • kciwsnurb@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Trains now are already much less lethal than cars. If safety is truly important for you, you would advocate for trains. You ain’t fooling anyone mate.

      • SuperIce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I wasn’t arguing against public transit. I either bike or use buses or the subway when I can. In cases where I’m going somewhere that has poor or no service by public transit, I need to use an Uber or now Waymo. I’ve been in both and the Waymo feels much safer than the vast majority of Uber drivers.

        • kciwsnurb@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You know the problem already: poor coverage of public transit. Why not advocate for that? It’s much safer than any cars, and we have the tech right now. We can stop killing people right now.