558
San Francisco protestors are disabling autonomous vehicles using traffic cones | "It's a great time" (www.techspot.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
188 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Safe Streets Rebel's protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 3 years ago (5 children)

We can't audit the code for humans, but we still let them drive.

If the output for computers driving is less than for humans and the computer designers are forced to be as financially liable for car crashes as humans, why shouldn't we let computers drive?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I'm not fully in either camp in this debate, but fwiw, the humans we let drive generally suffer consequences if there is an accident due to their own negligence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 3 years ago

    And I'm not denying it. However, it takes a very high bar to get someone convicted of vehicular manslaughter and that usually requires evidence that the driver was grossly negligent.

    If you can show that a computer can drive as well as a sober human, where is the gross negligence?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Because there's no valid excuse to prevent us from auditing their software and it could save lives. Why the hell should we allow then to use the road if they won't even let us inspect the engine?

    A car isn't a human. It's a machine, and it can and should be inspected. Anything less than that is pure recklessness.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago

    Why the hell should we allow then to use the road if they won't even let us inspect the engine?

    How do you think a car gets approved right now? Do we take it apart? Do we ask for the design calculations of how they designed each piece?

    That isn't what happens. There is no "audit" of parts or the whole. Instead, there is a series of tests to determine road worthiness that everything in a car has to pass. We've already accepted a black box for the electronics of a car. You don't need to get approval of your code to show that pressing the brake pedal causes the brake lights turn on; they just test it to make sure that it works.

    We don't audit the code already for life critical software already. It is all liability taken on by the manufacturers and verified via government testing of the finished product. What is an audit going to do when we don't it already?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent