- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Franken-algorithms: The Deadly Consequences of Unpredictable Code
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:34 pm to Oilfieldbiology
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:34 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Also as someone who likes to drink, I cannot wait for self driving cars
0
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:35 pm to Displaced
quote:
In the time it took you to create that post, 5 people were killed in human controlled automobile accidents.
What percent of cars are currently human controlled?
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:36 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
the object was six seconds away
only to the car was the woman noticed 6 seconds away. Watching the video Elaine Herzberg is visible only within 2 seconds of being struck.
quote:
was this algorithmic tragedy inevitable? And how used to such incidents would we, should we, be prepared to get?
The car sensed the woman crossing the road before any human driver would have. The better question is: would this have been avoided with a human driver? I personally think the answer to that is no.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:38 pm to Displaced
quote:Pretty irrelevant. Considering that 10’s of millions of human driven cars, probably more, drive safely during those 5 minutes compared to maybe 5 self driving cars probably on the road right now. And those are under tightly controlled conditions.
In the time it took you to create that post, 5 people were killed in human controlled automobile accidents.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:41 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
I'm willing to bet the % of deadly crashes attributed to machine/code error will be significantly lower than the crashes caused by human error
Well this woman died because of a computer error.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:41 pm to ashy larry
quote:You’d probably be wrong.
The better question is: would this have been avoided with a human driver? I personally think the answer to that is no.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:42 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
I just checked it out. You're right. I would have been hard-pressed not to hit her.
The backup driver was watching The Voice on her phone instead of watching where the car was going.
quote:
Just prior to the crash, Vasquez was looking at her lap for 5.3 seconds; she looked up half a second before the impact.
Death of Elaine Herzberg
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:46 pm to Ron Popeil
Shouldn't the default code for a "does not compute" error be "apply brakes" ????
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:47 pm to deeprig9
People writing the code are shitty drivers.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:49 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:But, you posted a bit about failure.
Just a matter of time. The human era is already over. The machine era is well underway
Posted on 7/29/19 at 3:59 pm to Ron Popeil
quote:I realize that. My point was that, after watching the video, even if I'd been paying full attention I probably would have hit her. She was visible for maybe two seconds. Best case scenario is I would have veered off the road and possibly hit something else.
The backup driver was watching The Voice on her phone instead of watching where the car was going.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 4:02 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
What kind of algorithm doesn't automatically reduce speed as an unidentified object draws near?
Some programmer shite the bed.
Why do you think operating systems and apps are constantly needing updates....
because programmers cannot ever account for all the possibilities that can and do present themselves in the real world.
The problem is not that the program could not "identify" the object.. rather the program incorrectly identified what was in front of it and what it was doing...
Posted on 7/29/19 at 4:09 pm to Jim Rockford
A computer should have known that that woman in the road would not be a good mother and should have been sterilized her so she couldn’t have kids.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 4:10 pm to JETigER
That daughter is what is wrong with America. Didn’t care about her mother until she was gonna get something out of it.
This post was edited on 7/29/19 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 7/29/19 at 6:42 pm to klrstix
quote:
The problem is not that the program could not "identify" the object.. rather the program incorrectly identified what was in front of it and what it was doing...
As I read it, the computer misidentified it several times over the course of a few seconds. Call it semantics if you want, but to me misidentifying something multiple times in a short time span means the object is unidentified.
But regardless, my point remains: if I am driving down the road and I see an object in my path that I can't identify, my reaction is to slow down to give myself time to react to the object as it draws closer. Basic driving. How this kind of logic was left out of the general algorithms is baffling to me as it is so fundamental in my mind's eye.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 7:11 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Also as someone who likes to drink, I cannot wait for self driving cars
Local gummits won't let that income disappear.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 7:12 pm to Jim Rockford
I've worked in industrial robotics, and even had to fix some coding errors that had pretty scary implications. The complexity in those systems (from shiny "man-machine interface" all the way down to the machine language and physical hardware) is pretty mind-boggling.
If there's a good way to take a system like that and prove it will absolutely never go off-plan in some catastrophic way, I haven't found it. I do think that the use of analog computers at the lowest levels might be an improvement. Analog computers were the backbone of the Manhattan Project, and probably the early parts of the space program. It is much easier to make conclusive statements about them than it is for their digital equivalents.
If there's a good way to take a system like that and prove it will absolutely never go off-plan in some catastrophic way, I haven't found it. I do think that the use of analog computers at the lowest levels might be an improvement. Analog computers were the backbone of the Manhattan Project, and probably the early parts of the space program. It is much easier to make conclusive statements about them than it is for their digital equivalents.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 8:28 pm to JPinLondon
quote:
Elaine Herzberg, with her groceries and skull contents leaking onto that road in Tempe thinks your reply is shitty, and wishes her life wasn't being experimented with by Silicon Valley.
This might be the most magnificently written response I have ever read, that could not be more wrong.
Posted on 7/29/19 at 9:34 pm to MoarKilometers
quote:
was more speaking on the origins of flight, when we were closer to 25% of the population we have now.
china was less than a billion.
India was 500 million.
Usa < 100 million
25% is a good number
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News