• DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The most basic driving like long stretches of highway shouldn’t be banned from using AI/automated driving. The fast paced inner city driving should be augmented but not fully automatic. Same goes for driving in inclement weather: augmented with hard limits on speed and automated braking for anything that could result in a crash

    Edit: I meant this statement as referring to the technology in it’s current consumer form (what is available to the public right at this moment). I fully expect that as the technology matures so will the percentage of incidents decline. We are likely to attain a largely driverless society one day in my lifetime

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Self driving with driver assist” or whatever they call it when it isn’t 100% automated is basically super fancy cruise control and should be treated as such. The main problem with the term autopilot is that for airplanes it means 100% control and very misleading when used for fancy cruise control in cars.

      I agree that it should be limited in use to highways and other open roads, like when cruise control should be used. People using cruise control in the city without being in control to brake is the same basic issue.

      Not 100% fully automated with no expectation of driver involvement should be allowed when it has surpassed regular drivers. To be honest, we might even be there with how terrible human drivers are…

      • GonzoVeritas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Autopilot systems on airplanes make fewer claims about autonomous operation than Tesla. No pilot relies completely on autopilot functionality.

      • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That would be the augmented part and the AI. ANYTHING that presents a potential hazard already takes a vehicle out of automated driving in most models, because after a few Teslas didn’t stop people started suing

    • amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree, I feel no matter how good the technology becomes, the odd one-in-a-million glitch that kills someone is not preferable to me over the accidents caused by humans. (Even if we assume the self driving cars crash at a lesser rate than human drivers).

      The less augmentation past lane assist and automated braking the better IMO. I definitely disagree with a capped speed limit built into the vehicle, that should never be limited less than what could melt engine components or something (and even that would be take time to turn on). The detriments that system would cause when it malfunctions far outweigh the benefits it would bring to safety.

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Its why im all for automated trucking. Truck drivers is a dwindling source and living the lifestyle of a cross country truck driver isnt highly sought after job. The self driving should do the large trip from hub to hub, and each hub ahould do the last few miles. Keeps drivers local and fixes a problem that is only going to get worse.