Rethinking “driverless cars”
We recorded 13 claims from this post. 4 were checked against evidence. 9 can’t be checked. 5 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (13)
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: Can’t be checkedSaid
“This is not true autonomy, but semi-autonomy. It might (I doubt it) save money, but it has literally nothing to do with AGI.”
What we tested: Remotely-assisted driving is semi-autonomy, not true autonomy; it might save money, though the author doubts it; and it has literally nothing to do with AGI.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Essentially NONE of the comparisons we have heard between humans and machines have looked at cars in which humans were not playing some role in the driving, either in the car or remotely.”
What we tested: Essentially none of the human-versus-machine comparisons we have heard looked at cars in which humans played no role in the driving, either in the car or remotely.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Waymo is probably better, but how much better is anybody’s guess.”
What we tested: Waymo is probably better, but how much better is anybody's guess.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Quite possible nobody will turn a profit in remote driving anytime soon; quite possibly everybody is spending quite heavily on remote assist centers, in hopes of achieving true autonomy.”
What we tested: It is quite possible no company will profit from remote-assisted driving anytime soon.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Remote driving itself is unlikely to work well enough as an endgame on public roads, because data communications just aren’t stable enough.”
What we tested: Remote driving is unlikely to work well enough as a long-term solution on public roads because data communications are not stable enough.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Uber and Lyft can stop worrying about being disintermediated by machines; they will still need human drivers for quite some time.”
What we tested: Uber and Lyft can stop worrying about being disintermediated by machines, because they will still need human drivers for quite some time.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“The whole self-driving cars industry is this likely to be viewed in a few years as an epic fail, crushed by outliers and AI that could not reason adequately.”
What we tested: Within a few years the self-driving car industry will likely be seen as an epic failure, defeated by outliers and AI's inadequate reasoning.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Driver-assist (a la Tesla) with humans in the loop may well stay, occasionally causing fatal accidents, given its lack of reliability, but the idea of using your car moonlighting as a self-driving taxi is not happening this decade, maybe not even next.”
What we tested: Personal cars moonlighting as self-driving taxis will not happen this decade, and maybe not next decade either.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Driver-assist (a la Tesla) with humans in the loop may well stay, occasionally causing fatal accidents, given its lack of reliability”
What we tested: Driver-assist systems like Tesla's may persist while occasionally causing fatal accidents due to unreliability.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“We may see similar disappointments in safety-critical applications of LLMs (eg medicine), years of promise, but humans still for a very long time required in the loop, true autonomy difficult to achieve.”
What we tested: LLMs in safety-critical domains like medicine may disappoint, requiring humans in the loop for a very long time.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“High-reliability is not their forte. and nor are outliers. They won’t take humans out of the loop.”
What we tested: LLMs (transformers) are not highly reliable and do not handle outliers well, and they won't take humans out of the loop in the pursuit of Level 5 self-driving.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“If true self-driving is this hard, despite the amount of data that has been collected and amount of money invested ($100B+), any dreams of AGI happening soon are likely wildly unrealistic.”
What we tested: If true self-driving is this hard despite the data collected and $100B+ invested, any dreams of AGI happening soon are likely wildly unrealistic.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“No fantasy about AGI thus far has survived contact with the real world.”
What we tested: No AGI fantasy so far has held up against the real world.
Held from this post (5)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: It appears that most or all self-driving work at present is much closer to driver-assist or remotely-assisted driving, and that all published numbers are really about those two, with no disclosure of how much remote centers contribute to the results.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: If all the self-driving efforts are leaning heavily (e.g., hourly) on call centers, true self-driving is a long way away, and anyone who thinks true Level 5 self-driving is close has probably been deceived.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: Cruise has more support staff than vehicles and is currently burning money rather than saving it.
- The two reviews read the claim differently