this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
210 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37739 readers
515 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Count0@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a moved goalpost, and you know it.

If liability is forced on them, that is a huge difference from them voluntarily accepting responsibility. That is what would indicate that they trusted the service they provided.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think the issue here is that you like many other people seem to imagine that because a system is called "full self driving" it literally means that. As if it's either fully human controlled or fully AI controlled and there's no inbetween. No, this is just overly simplified black and white thinking that misses all the nuances about the subject.

Is the company legally liable for the actions of the self driving car? If no, then they don’t trust the vehicles.

This is utter nonsense. These companies aren't not-liable for the accidents they cause. Ofcourse they don't want to be and would rather swipe these incidents under the rug but that's just not going to happen. There howerer just isn't a precedent. This is brand new technology that no one has seen before. What the liability of these companies is going to be the end is still under debate. It's just a blatant lie at this point to claim they have no liability as if that's something that's been settled.

[–] Count0@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Jesus, You're like a ChatGPT bot.

Given your prolific posting in this thread, the bullshit about not wanting a FSD vehicle yourself 'because you like driving', and the frankly intentional misreading of what I write as a direct response to what you're saying, I have to ask how long you've been in the employ of some car manufacturer?

Also, I'm sick of your patronizing tone:

I think the issue here is that you like many other people seem to imagine that because a system is called “full self driving” it literally means that. As if it’s either fully human controlled or fully AI controlled and there’s no inbetween. No, this is just overly simplified black and white thinking that misses all the nuances about the subject.

I have an educational background in mathematics, and I'm fairly certain I understand the math of Neural Networks better than you do. I also am aware of their shortcomings.

I hate people that assume that people that disagree with them are paid or bots. But when you make as many intentional bad-faith arguments combined with your asshole patronizing tone, I can't help but believe that you're a fucking paid astro-turfing asshole.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well, considering how angry you're getting and the fact that you're now resorting to mind-reading, ad-hominem attacks, and plain old name-calling, I can definitely tell you're not a chatGPT bot, lol.

However, since you're not making any further attempts to convince me otherwise, and I don't feel like repeating the same point, I take that the debate is over then. Have a nice day, and thanks for the discussion. Pleasure seems to be on my side.