as the comment chain below highlights, autonomous driving AI is completely different from LLMs. Computer vision and control theory have made big improvements because of machine learning, do you despise this too?
Comment on Death of beloved neighborhood cat sparks outrage against robotaxis in San Francisco
VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yet another reason to despise AI. Animals deserve to be safe too. We’ve already taken so much from them as it is.
5gruel@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
deathbird@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
It is a bit frustrating how these different technologies are bunched under the same inaccurate moniker.
Auli@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Then keep the car inside. Outdoor cats are not safe and get killed by cars animals.
EtherWhack@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yes, keep the car inside.
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 3 weeks ago
Please, keep your car in their car bedroom at all times.
reddifuge@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Ai has a proven track record of causing less accidents, and killing far fewer animals per km traveled than the average driver.
majster@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
link from the article latimes.com/…/woman-gets-millions-after-getting-d…
People get jail time, what do we do with machines?
Kissaki@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Hold the manufacturers and operators (specifically for company operated) accountable?
The machine is the product, not the operator. We don’t jail classic cars either. We hold their operators accountable. The one in control. Self driving has a shift of who is in control - now “indirectly”.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
if only that were the truth.
these companies will attempt to settle for bottom dollar or drag it out so long you’ll have to go homeless to pay the legal fees.
there is no justice left in the legal system. justice isn’t just blind anymore, she’s been decapitated.
Auli@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Accountable for what killing a stray cat? Come on if you don’t want your cat to be hit keep it inside. I don’t get how people think it’s ok for a cat to wander. Even though it’s probably illegal.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
here you dropped this
your figures (though I doubt them) don’t include the skew of driver vs driverless vehicles. of course driverless cars are 92% less likely to have an accident involving animals. that’s because driverless cars account for less than 1% of the entire vehicle population.
but it does randomly hallucinate.
reddifuge@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 3 weeks ago
the AI in cars is not the same as the AI in LLMs, it’s not programmed to guess its way to a conclusion.
that being said, it’s still far from perfect, and shouldn’t be on the road yet.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
teslas make some pretty crazy assumptions (hallucinations).
ever see the one where it sees pedestrians in a cemetery?
or how about the accidents where they veer off the road because the lines were missing.
magguzu@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
Public transportation does this too and isn’t controlled by some company trying to make graphs go up
Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Don’t worry. A lot of places are also trying to privatize their public transportation.
ContriteErudite@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
There are also a lot of people out there that will intentionally swerve to hit an animal. Mark Rober made a video a long time ago where 6% of drivers went out of their way to hit animals that were just chilling on the shoulder.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Fp7flAWMA
1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
fucked up that people do that.
Auli@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
And have a nice habit of being turned off before the accident so the AI didn’t cause the accident. Numbers are bullshit.
sobchak@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
I believe these cars drive on the same roads all day, whereas people are likely to be driving in and out of areas these systems are not familiar with. I suppose a good comparison would be of a taxi driver that only operates in the same area as the driverless cars, if that exists.