Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
jwz

Once again, "AI" is revealed to be an army of mechanical turks in a call center.

Cruse "autonomous"vehicles require 1.5 drivers, and manual intervention every two and a half miles:

Half of Cruise's 400 cars were in San Francisco when the driverless...
jwz.org/b/ykFs

10 comments
Martha Bridegam

@jwz

In the second-to-last paragraph of the NYT story.

acb

@jwz “AI” is not about eliminating labour but alienating it for optimal profit extraction

Brooke is sad 🏳️‍⚧️:transfem_flat:​:neurodiversity:​

@jwz This is the scariest possible outcome for "not me" driving a car >_>.

I'de rather take my chances with broken AI than a company hiring minimum wake workers to remote control a machine that can easily kill me with me inside.

Seriously... if an imployee ententionally or unintentionally caused an accident, the most they would have is being let go. The outside world thinks they are autonomous! So would the police. And the company wouldn't self-report due to being exposed.

Like. What. the. fuck.
This would qualify for Black Mirror

@jwz This is the scariest possible outcome for "not me" driving a car >_>.

I'de rather take my chances with broken AI than a company hiring minimum wake workers to remote control a machine that can easily kill me with me inside.

Seriously... if an imployee ententionally or unintentionally caused an accident, the most they would have is being let go. The outside world thinks they are autonomous! So would the police. And the company wouldn't self-report due to being exposed.

Brooke is sad 🏳️‍⚧️:transfem_flat:​:neurodiversity:​

@jwz I like this person's comment:

>

@boonq
"its rivals fear Cruise's issues could lead to tougher driverless car rules for all of them"

Why would that be a problem, if their driverless vehicles actually work? Every rule would be irrelevant, because their vehicles already follow these rules on account of already working. It would be like legislating that all Californians are required to breathe oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. It'd be a useless regulation because its requirements are already met and surpassed, on account of [two words omitted to provide you a fun little puzzle]

@jwz I like this person's comment:

>

@boonq
"its rivals fear Cruise's issues could lead to tougher driverless car rules for all of them"

Why would that be a problem, if their driverless vehicles actually work? Every rule would be irrelevant, because their vehicles already follow these rules on account of already working. It would be like legislating that all Californians are required to breathe oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. It'd be a useless regulation because its requirements are already met...

Andy Nortrup

@jwz@mastodon.social so they were doing supervised machine learning reinforcement on public streets with people in the passenger seat.

Laukidh :ablobcool:

@jwz it’s amazing to me that they tried to scale out before having a working product.

But I suppose that’s a feeling I’ve had since my first tech industry job.

🐙🐇🐝Pointed Sarah🐞🐡🐧

@jwz as far as I'm concerned this rock solid proof that driverless cars aren't doing better than human error and that they don't know how to make them do better than human error

Nicole Parsons

@jwz

Terry Pratchett wrote about the Gooseberry Disorganizer, operated by an imp inside.

wiki.lspace.org/Dis-organiser

Aren't "autonomous vehicles" just same?

Technology calling itself magic, when it's just a machine using trapped imps as underpaid labor?

Peter Kovář

@jwz I read it Curse.
Seriously Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

Go Up