this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
560 points (94.2% liked)

Technology

59472 readers
2620 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Driverless cars worse at detecting children and darker-skinned pedestrians say scientists::Researchers call for tighter regulations following major age and race-based discrepancies in AI autonomous systems.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Weird question, but why does a car need to know if it's a person or not? Like regardless of if it's a person or a car or a pole, maybe don't drive into it?

Is it about predicting whether it's going to move into your path? Well can't you just just LIDAR to detect an object moving and predict the path, why does it matter if it's a person?

Is it about trolley probleming situations so it picks a pole instead of a person if it can't avoid a crash?

[–] almar_quigley@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im guessing it can’t detect them as objects at all, not that it can’t classify them as humans.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That seems like the car is relying way too much on video to detect surroundings...

[–] Haquer@lemmy.today 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 year ago

Haha yes, but from the article I got the impression it was across all tested brands. Tesla is being called out at the moment for not having the appropriate hardware that other brands are using (e.g. LIDAR).

[–] fresh@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Conant and Ashby’s good regulator theorem in cybernetics says, “Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system.”

The AI needs an accurate model of a human to predict how humans move. Predicting the path of a human is different than predicting the path of other objects. Humans can stand totally motionless, pivot, run across the street at a red light, suddenly stop, fall over from a heart attack, be curled up or splayed out drunk, slip backwards on some ice, etc. And it would be computationally costly, inaccurate, and pointless to model non-humans in these ways.

I also think trolley problem considerations come into play, but more like normativity in general. The consequences of driving quickly amongst humans is higher than amongst human height trees. I don’t mind if a car drives at a normal speed on a tree lined street, but it should slow down on a street lined with playing children who could jump out at anytime.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks, you make some good points. (safe) human drivers drive differently in situations with a lot of people in them, and we need to replicate that in self-driving cars.

[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Anyone who quotes Ashby et al gets an upvote from me! I'm always so excited to see cybernetic thinking in the wild.

[–] RobotToaster@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago

Cameras and image recognition are cheaper than LIDAR/RADAR, so Tesla uses it exclusively.

[–] duffman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They need to safely ignore shadows, oil stains on the road, just because there's contrast on an image doesn't mean it's an object.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure but why on earth are we relying on cameras to drive cars? Many modern cars have radar, which is far more reliable.

[–] duffman@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Natural vision is awesome, it works for billions of humans. We just have nothing close to what the human eyes and brain offers in terms of tech in that spectrum.

I think it needs to be a combination of sensors since radar sucks in the rain/snow/fog.