12 comments

  • john_strinlai 12 minutes ago

    >Some of the crashes, including at least one of the fatal incidents, may have involved the use of “forked” or modified versions of Comma.ai’s software, according to the ODI.

    i am still hesitant of tesla and similarly large players, it seems absolutely wild to me that people are using a fork of a small company's software to drive their car.

      neuronexmachina 3 minutes ago

      I was curious about what various forks actually do, found a list of some here: https://commaguide.com/compare/

      JKCalhoun 4 minutes ago

      "…may have involved the use of “forked” or modified versions of Comma.ai’s software…"

      Or, it could just be scapegoating. Like blaming AI for blowing up a girl's school.

      FLeXMurphy 9 minutes ago

      Should it drive someone else's car instead?

  • WithinReason 9 minutes ago

    AFAIK their driver monitoring is very good and checks if you're looking at the road, so I wonder how this happened.

  • globular-toast 10 minutes ago

    Is it legal to operate a motor vehicle modified to such an extent on a public highway? Retrofitted self driving using, as far as I can tell, completely unregulated software seems absolutely crazy to me. Free software is a good thing, but don't run your buggy shit in a way that can hurt others.

  • mrpippy 24 minutes ago

    Completely predictable. They’ll likely dodge a lawsuit in this case (since the car that was hit was an unoccupied police car) but it will inevitably happen.

  • phoronixrly 23 minutes ago

    This goes to show that any car, be it internal combustion, electric, manually operated or self-driving is still a car, and thus is still capable of inflicting death (among other negatives). The difference is still just in the frequency of deaths (and with self-driving this is still under debate).

      password54321 18 minutes ago

      >This goes to show that any car, be it internal combustion, electric, manually operated or self-driving is still a car, and thus is still capable of inflicting death (among other negatives).

      No shit.

      >The difference is still just in the frequency of deaths (and with self-driving this is still under debate).

      No, the difference is not just frequency. It is, what is the probability I would have made the same mistake. Some of these cases would very unlikely have happened by a (sober) person. Which demonstrates, that we are still dealing with incredibly jagged intelligence.

        JKCalhoun a few seconds ago

        Regardless, self-driving software can't make mistakes. Not one.

        Saying that it's better than a human driver is not adequate. I think as a a society we (begrudgingly) make allowances for human error. There is zero solace for a death at the hands of an algorithm.