Re:On being wrong about AI
by rwmj on Thursday December 14, 2023 @06:40AM
(#38640290)
We have self-driving cars already, but they're not evenly distributed ... and they have an unsatisfying amount of human input behind the scenes.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Well, I mean, if you're willing to stretch the definition to beyond breaking, sure, but we don't have anything that the average person in the street would think of as a self-driving car. Anyone claiming a self-driving car today is a bit high on their own marketing, and there's no clear route to getting beyond that point.
I summon a Waymo car every few days, and it takes me from point A to point B for about the same price as an Uber or Lyft. This only works so long as point A and B are both in San Francisco, but for an average person in San Francisco with access to the app, self-driving cars are already here. You can argue that person isn't average for a number of reasons, but the cars are real and giving rides to members of the general public.
https://youtu.be/-Rxvl3INKSg is a news reporter's video of taking a ride in one, so you can see what it's like to ride in one. She's a news reporter and thus not your average person because she has access to Waymo because she's a reporter, but members of the general public are also getting access and are able to do this as well. After watching that, I think a reasonable average person could believe that self driving cars are here.
As was said upthread, the future is here but unevenly distributed.
The report that came out was about Cruise. Waymo didn't have the same "unsatisfying amount of human input behind the scenes".
Re:On being wrong about AI
by NoGravitas on Thursday December 14, 2023 @11:29AM
(#38643145)
As far as you know, yet.