Thorny_Insight @ Thorny_Insight @lemm.ee

---

Read more

Posts

41

Comments

1,874

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's called Full Self Driving (Supervised)

Yeah, it will be able to drive without driver intervention eventually. Atleast that's their goal. Right now however, it's level 2 and no-one is claiming otherwise.

In what way is it not ready to use?

In what way is it not ready to use? Does cars have some other driver assistant features that are fool proof? You're not supposed to blindly trust any of those. Why would FSD be an exception? The standards people are aplying to it are quite unreasonable.

I can't find any source for that claim

Then what is full self driving to you? How good does the system need to be to qualify?

The new models with hardware 4 (atleast models S and X) have a radar but then again humans can manage without so I have no doubt that a vision-based system will be more than sufficient in the end.

Intelligence is not binary, but a spectrum.

The cynicism here is hilarious. This is literal good news but no, it's actually just further proof how shitty the republicans are.

placing the burden on the legal system to prove it to the contrary.

That's how it should be. Everyone is innocent until proven otherwise.

80 people die every single day in traffic accidents in the US alone and we're focusing on the leading company trying to solve this issue when their car almost hits a train.

It’s about as intelligent as a newborn.

Newborns can't even utter one cohesive word. I don't get the point of making such an obviously false claims about anything.

How does it not fully self drive? What's your definition of full self driving then?

Mercedes Drive Pilot is Level 3 and even it will prompt you to take over when necessary, does it not fully self drive then either? What about Waymo/Cruze? They have remote operators controlling the vehicles when they get stuck. Not fully self driving either? Is the standard that it needs to be absolutely flawless and never fail or what is it?

It's called Full Self Driving (Supervised) nowdays. They changed the name.

The vehicle is capable of driving you to the grocery store on the other side of the city and back, sometimes with zero interventions from the driver. If that's not Full Self Driving then I don't know what is.

Even this "article" is about nothing happening. The driver was paying attention and took over when the vehicle was about to do something it should. Just as they should.

Also, even if FSD was 10x safer than a human driver and we replaced every single car on the roads with Teslas there would still be 8 people dying every single day in the US alone. Linking articles about these accidents does not prove it being unsafe. It only feeds the confirmation bias of the person posting it and the people upvoting it. People want it to be unsafe so that they can shit on Elon. The standards they apply to Tesla are ridiculous compared to that of other companies. The extremely limited Mercedes Drive Pilot is praised as revolutionary tech while FSD already checks most boxes for Level 4 self-driving.

I don't think it's capable of doing what the ultimate goal of Neuralink is, which is much more than being able to move a cursor on the screen. Science and technology wont stop advancing just because it's potenttially risky.

That's up to the individual, I don't think there's universal answer to that. If it eventually makes it possible to restore a person's sight, hearing or the ability to walk, I'm sure most would take the gamble.

And I'm sure they're aware of that. What are you trying to say here? Abandon development of this technology?

Alternative perspective is to think that does watching normal porn make heterosexual men more likely to rape women? If not then why would it be different in this case?

The vast majority of pedophiles never offend. Most people in jail for child abuse are just plain old rapists with no special interest towards minors, they're just an easy target. Pedophilia just describes what they're attracted to. It's not a synonym to child rapist. It usually needs to coinside with psychopathy to create the monster that most people think about when hearing that word.

Nirvana fallacy

Yeah would be nice. Unfortunelately it isn't so and it's never going to. Chasing after people generating distasteful AI pictures is not making the world a better place.

Wtf is this thinking.

Dispassionate, intellectually honest analysis.

Is every non-blindly hateful person a fanboy? Any chance that some of us just look at things as they are instead of getting emotionally invested with it?