Has no-one at nVidia seen 2001 Space Odessy ffs?

More to the point why teach a car to drive like a human at all?

it relied entirely on an algorithm that had taught itself to drive by watching a human do it.

More to the point why teach a car to drive like a human at all?

+1 - over the years I've also observed humans driving (sometimes at quarters that are too close for comfort) and if the computer has learnt one thing I'd hope it's that you shouldn't do it anything like a chuffing human would.

More to the point why teach a car to drive like a human at all?

How long until the AI revolts, turns the motor off and invents a better, cleaner and more affordable mass transit model? Because we seem to be stuck.

[img] [/img]

I don't fear the rise of AI - yeah we've all seen Terminator, big scary robot with guns - yeah nice try, I've got a room full of Nerdy Kids downstairs who've have it singing show tunes inside 5 mins and if Skynet renders them obsolete, well I can destroy a grands worth of smart phone a week when I'm trying to do the exact opposite - I'd brick the ****er within the hour.

Sorry not read the full article.... but there was something about this or similar on channel 4 news last night.

An AI system was let loose in the Dark net .... and bought a shed load of drugs and guns... 😯

An AI system was let loose in the Dark net .... and bought a shed load of drugs and guns

Was it this AI?

[img] [/img]

If a car is learning to drive by mimicking humans surely that's more Artificial Stupidity than Artificial Intelligence?

[i] why teach a car to drive like a human at all?[/i]

I'd say there's clues in this sentence:
[i]The experimental vehicle, developed by researchers...[/i]

we've all seen Terminator, big scary robot with guns

I've always thought that the vision of killer humanoid robots was kind of silly.

If an AI [i]did[/i] decide to wipe us out then it wouldn't do it on our terms, at our scale, with stand up exchange of gunfire. 😆

Anyway.. Sophia seems lovely..

dangeourbrain - Member

More to the point why teach a car to drive like a human at all?

Understanding how humans drive lets it interact better on the road with humans. (you can build a car that reacts to its surroundings but predicting behavior could be a useful addition)

The article points it out but the dangerous bit isn't AIs that want to destroy all humans... It's that the AI might learn something we don't want it to, and then because we don't fully understand its operation, it's hard or impossible to get it to unlearn. Like teaching a little kid to say ****. So rather than skynet, we get self-aware BMW X5s that park in every disabled space in the country because they've learned from human-operated X5s.

30 odd year old comic strip with a bloke chuffin on on e cigar 😯

[img] [/img]

the AI might learn something we don't want it to, and then because we don't fully understand its operation, it's hard or impossible to get it to unlearn.

Also - culpability is a huge issue in this. If the software is auditable then its author could be held responsible if it kills someone. If the car has learned itself and no-one knows how it works, who's responsible?

Can't control what you can't understand ! the rise of the machines begins!

[IMG] [/IMG]

and if we make them [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39533308 ]inadvertently racist too[/url] ! 😯

inadvertently racist

Wow. F*** humans, seriously. We can't even make intelligent artificial intelligence.

Back to cars - since Henry Ford rolled out the Model T we haven't changed the transport model at all. It just took us over while staying the same. It literally dictated how we build/destroy towns, how we isolate, how we work, how we de-prioritise physical health/air quality/physical activity, even how we identify ourselves as humans. I don't see the 'self-driving car' as anything other than a taxi-driver.

You still get a person sitting in a tonne of steel on wheels that delivers the person to work. To work, in order to chisel away at the ongoing personal debt incurred by the tonne of steel on wheels?

Science Fiction becoming science Fact!

Well.... If non of the 353,000 children born last monday was christened "Leon Kowalski" we should be fine.

It just took us over

No. The car didn't? do all those things, it just facilitated them. All that was in our nature all along.

Well things [i]may[/i] change with self-driving cars:
- much less need actually own a car if you can just have a suitable one show up whenever you need it.
- hopefully this means less need to have parking spaces everywhere
- cars themselves can vary in size. You might summon a little single seater for your commute then a people carrier for a family day out at the weekend.
- less ferrying kids about to various activities. They can go themselves!

<came expecting hoverboards 😥 >

[quote=molgrips ]Also - culpability is a huge issue in this. If the software is auditable then its author could be held responsible if it kills someone. If the car has learned itself and no-one knows how it works, who's responsible?

One point which seems to have been missed is that software for driving cars on public roads is safety critical, which involves a level of audit above ordinary software. I'm not quite sure what is going to give, because it's hard to imagine autonomous software which nobody fundamentally understands passing such audits - I can only assume that for testing purposes they get around this by the software not being completely autonomous.

Why don't they just build another AI and teach it to explain to us how the first AI reached it's decisions?

I don't see the 'self-driving car' as anything other than a taxi-driver.

People didn't see the first cars as anything other than a horseless carriage.

New technology is always viewed through the eyes of the old, even down to the name... "horseless" carriage, "driverless" car ...

AI controlled / Driverless cars will be ace when ALL vehicles on the road are this way.

Maybe there'll come a time, first, when motorways can only be used by AI controlled cars/Trucks. Self organising into neat convoys all heading the same way at a safe speed for the traffic density. All the cars tucked into the slipstream of a truck to improve efficiency. You relinquish control on the sliproad after telling the car which exit you're heading for, take over again at the desired exit point.

Too much to ask?

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/13/ai-programs-exhibit-racist-and-sexist-biases-research-reveals ]the future is bleak the future is racist and sexist[/url].

Too much to ask?

Actually, far less to ask that, than to ask for a complete taxi service AI that can navigate towns and country lanes with farmers moving herds of cows around and people who can't cross roads properly jumping out in front of you and BMW X5 drivers cutting you up to reach their disabled parking space.

Doing a motorway stint is quite a nice small problem by comparison, and I'd imagine the current AI can handle that already.

Doing a motorway stint is quite a nice small problem by comparison, and I'd imagine the current AI can handle that already.

I think an easy hit currently would be to get the cars to drive in convoys with the front vehicle (e.g. an HGV) under manual control - with no lane changes etc. it would be relatively straightforward.

I don't think driverless cars have a place around town, because you can't have a driverless bike or driverless pedestrian - both of which are more suitable for city centre transport.

[url= https://www.wired.com/2017/04/bill-gates-wrong-solution-ai-taking-jobs-training-not-taxes/ ]Someone from IBM weighing in.[/url]

I don't think driverless cars have a place around town, because you can't have a driverless bike or driverless pedestrian - both of which are more suitable for city centre transport.

But a city-bound driverless car could easily be a little electric pod - which is a good halfway house. You could even have set pod routes through town like trams - they'd be vastly cheaper to implement.

I don't think driverless cars have a place around town

I'd say they have [i]more[/i] place than a driver[i]ed[/i] car. They can be considerably smaller, ownerless, shared, and parked away from the kerbside when not in use.

Yes - you don't need to park it at your house, and you don't have to deal with cabbies who drive awfully.

[img] [/img]