Face it, self-driving cars still haven’t earned their stripes
We recorded 7 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 4 can’t be checked. 5 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (7)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Nobody has yet figured out how to build a driverless car that can deal with that fact.”
What we tested: Nobody has yet figured out how to build a driverless car that can deal with the real world's endless crazy and out-of-the-ordinary circumstances.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“(If that doesn’t remind you of LLMs, you aren’t paying attention.)”
What we tested: Marcus suggests that the way driverless-car safety depends on data rather than reasoning should remind attentive readers of LLMs.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“In fact, the truth is we don’t actually have any truly self-driving cars yet.”
What we tested: There are not yet any truly self-driving cars: every 'self-driving vehicle' on public roads has either a human safety driver on board or a remote human who can help it when issues arise.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Scaling up to driving everywhere all the time without a well-vetted serious, well-vetted solution to the edge case problem was insane; it was quite literally an accident (or series of accidents) waiting to happen.”
What we tested: Approving 24/7 driverless operation across San Francisco without a vetted solution to edge cases was reckless and bound to lead to accidents.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Edge cases are everywhere; they are in driving, they are in medicine, they there will be a zillion of them humanoid robots, if and when we roll them out. Anyone who thinks any of this is going to be easy is fooling themselves.”
What we tested: Edge cases are everywhere, including in driving and medicine; there will be a zillion of them in humanoid robots if and when they are rolled out; and anyone who thinks any of this will be easy is fooling themselves.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“If we don’t, we are likely to see reprises of what we see now with driverless cars, in automated doctors, automated psychiatrists, all purpose virtual assistants, home robots, and more, probably for years to come.”
What we tested: If we do not shift our focus toward developing new methodologies for coping with edge cases, we are likely to see reprises of today's driverless-car problems in automated doctors, automated psychiatrists, all-purpose virtual assistants, home robots and more, probably for years to come.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“I wouldn’t trust a self-driving plane, and I don’t think any quasi-self-driving car has yet earned its stripes either.”
What we tested: Marcus would not trust a self-driving plane, and he does not think any quasi-self-driving car has yet earned its stripes.
Held from this post (5)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Every proto-self-driving car still needs a human 'nanny' and still struggles, and increasing their operations after the CPUC approval in San Francisco has led to chaos.
- Attribution is uncertain
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Although snow and rain are less of a problem than in 2016, edge cases have by no means gone away, and how safe you are in a driverless car still depends too much on the vagaries of data and not enough on reasoning.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: However much data driverless cars are trained on, they will always meet new situations their training does not cover.