>Not to mention that AI vision systems are susceptible to adversarial attacks ... The situation is dire.

That's like saying a human driver can be blinded with a bright light so the situation is dire.

New world, old rules. You'll still go to jail for manslaughter (or whatever the charge would be).

Fwiw maps used for autonomous vehicles are higher fidelity than consumer maps. Furthermore the cars are generally equipped with IMUs so that they don't get thrown off by urban canyons, clouds, etc. And more error correction (particle filters, visual cues + map data) is used to pinpoint your location on a map.

Adversarial attacks are concerning for any AI model, but autonomous vehicles aren't all AI. Lots of rules and heuristics and pre-knowledge are utilized. In the end if something is uncertain it generally amounts to "slam on the brakes" which is more a ux problem than a safety problem.

There is no « better quality » map out there (unless maybe military and restricted).

Mapping the world is hard because it is complex and evolve way faster than a Google Car army can patrol it for a reasonable cost. More often than not OpenStreetMap which is a community project is more up to date than commercial map, but it’s not precise enough. Beside nobody would bet there life on something that is Wikipedia-like editable by ill-intentioned trolls.

This is precisely why all autonomous car rely heavily on computer vision and why adversial attacks should be carefully considered.

Uncertainty will indeed « slam on brake » but adversial attack don’t aim to generate uncertainty the aim to generate false certitudes.

Nope. There are higher fidelity maps. You should read about robotics.

It's true these maps don't exist for the whole world yet but it's also why all sdc companies are launching in metros. They're building them.

Vision is good at recognition but bad at localization. This is the real problem. In robotics a fundamental problem is SLAM. You should read about it.

Could you explicit acronyms? They seem very business specific but I would gladly learn about theses projects as I often use cartographic products for my work.

UX problem unless in traffic; getting rammed by the next car is not my idea of safety (not to mention that slamming the brakes for no apparent reason is a textbook example of reckless driving in many places). Oh well, let's just not drive unless the street is empty, I guess ;o)

Well map software on a phone isn't written to specs that account for liability for human life for one. Apples and oranges.

It should be. They're used as inputs to humans making decisions at highway speeds. Now obviously we allow this because we assume humans are intelligent enough and have enough of a model of the real world in their head that they should be able to cope with these issues but I see no reason why an AI driving a car should cross a lower bar. I fully expect that AI to take mapping errors into account and to survive them.