It's not "intelligent", it's a dumb computer that is programmed by humans. The people responsible for putting it on the road must be liable.

It's not intelligent but it's also not programmed by humans in the sense that someone painstakingly put explicit logic for the possible cases.

It is programmed by humans. Machine learning algorithms are designed and implemented by humans. If machine learning algorithms do not perform well in a way that puts human lives at risk, the humans who designed and implemented them are responsible.

nope, its trained as a neural network. Nobody ever sits down and programs in 'how to handle an intersection with a bike lane' other than putting that sort of driving experience into its training data. It may have modules designed for general scenarios (i.e. one module is great at freeway driving, another is great at intersections etc) but still trained by experience.

It's programmed by humans. Get over it. It's not intelligent, it's not "learning" it's following instructions, saving data, and iterating. Your comment is obvious to the point of meaninglessness.

This tendency to buzzword out of obvious truths (NN's are programs for example) derails rational discussion.

This comment breaks the HN guidelines by being uncivil as well as by calling names in the sense described here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Doing these things derails discussion much faster than an obvious comment, so would you please (re-)read the rules and abide by the spirit of this site when posting here?

Thanks, I appreciate the check. Sorry about that jobigoud.

> may as well declare the AI guilty now right?

AI (short of AGI) is never guilty; it's creators and operators, OTOH...