News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Optical illusions that flummox computers by craigching on Saturday April 15, 2017 @11:16PM (#14124154)
I may be restating some of what has been said elsewhere, but I hope that this simplifies things a bit.

What I believe the grandparent said was we should slow-roll neural networks where they have severe consequences, as in, life and death.

I agree, slow-rolling the internet would have potentially affected adoption, but the stakes are lower than, say, a self-driving car going off the rails. In those cases, we should probably thoroughly understand how a car can be affected by adversarial attempts at "breaking the algo" before adopting it very widely.

In other words, I wouldn't slow roll the internet because of fears of adversarial behavior, but I would in the face of self-driving cars.

I hope that further discussion could describe how internet security is as life-and-death as self-driving cars, or to the contrary :)

Re:Optical illusions that flummox computers by Dylan16807 on Sunday April 16, 2017 @12:41AM (#14124359)
We don't have to be particularly worried about self-driving cars being confused by malicious physical actors. Such an actor could always do something like cut the brake lines instead.
Re:Optical illusions that flummox computers by mholt on Sunday April 16, 2017 @10:52AM (#14125999)
That's easy to detect. A car with cut brake lines can choose not to drive. A car doesn't know when its neural net is being fooled.