view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
Serious reply: The computer navigates until it's unable to navigate and then we'll hand over to the driver. Unfortunately that just means the computer is navigated you into a very difficult position which you don't have much time to recover from.
Funny reply: if you can always claim collisions or the responsibility of a driver, you don't have to answer difficult questions about ethics of artificial drivers, and their efficaciousness..
Tesla's done some bold things recently like removing lidar. And that's going to make it harder to defend the robot driver when they make mistakes. Removing information from the command and control is difficult to justify
Source: trust me bro again.
You are meant to keep your hands on the wheel at all times and pay attention when using the system. There are multiple layers of warnings if you don't and the system will eventually not allow you to activate it if you ignore the warnings. If you sit there and watch as autopilot drives you off a cliff, it's your fault.
Yes Elon has been dodgey as fuck with his timelines, taking people's money and making great claims about the future capabilities of the system and is just an all around asshole but can we try and ground our criticisms in facts?
There are plenty of things we can and should be critical of when it comes to Tesla and making things up just makes it easier for genuine criticisms to be dismissed.
Apologies to you if you actually are making well backed claims, it's just frustrating to see so much noise when it comes to Tesla and people often just throwing random bs out there.
This is a discussion forum, so I'm discussing. I'm not citing sources as you have twice noted.
Like it or not. People are going to associate any Tesla crash with the failure of Elon musk's assisted driving system. Even if we look at a very sensible market participant like waymo, any waymo vehicle incident will be associated with the self-driving nature of the car. This is normal for any novel technology. All the downsides get associated with the novelness.
It certainly my hope it's statistically any issues that arise from automated driving are going to be less likely than issues arriving arising from human driving, especially intoxicated driving.. Until we get to that point where everyone knows that, we're going to have media that's associated with the downsides.
On that we can absolutely agree and I think scrutiny is definitely warranted with any new technology especially one which has such a huge profit motive. My issue in this case was with the original claim that the system intentionally disengages at the last minute for the purpose of avoiding liability for any crash. Big call.
Anyway, I was probably overly sarcastic and flippant which doesn't help my point so sorry for venting my frustrations like that. Hopefully these technologies get the scrutiny they deserve without hysteria any time there's a crash that 'possibly' involved autopilot.
I don't think that's the main reason autopilot hands over when it's about to crash, but I think that is a factor that was part of the design.
I think a lawyer definitely was consulted during the design of assisted driving to human driver hand off. Can I cite sources no. It's just sensible. If you were designing a system, that involved life and death decisions, you would have lawyers involved. Any good lawyer would help you limit your liability by moving the decision making to the human when something was about to go wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBvIWFq-fGc Are drivers like this ready to take over in an emergency in less than a second? No. Elon musk does no favors to his system by calling it fully automated driving. Or whatever the term is. Which is misleading. Driver assistance should be assistance, but the more you take the driver out of the loop the more they get distracted the more they are not in the right context to jump in. That's human nature. So there's going to be a balance we have to find between automated hands-off driving and humans being responsible. I don't think Tesla's found that right balance.
And I 100% believe lawyers are involved to limit liability at least so that statements can be made but self-driving system was not at fault for the car crash. It was not engaged at the time of the crash. 100% believe that was a factor in their handover logic. I can't prove it. But the preponderance of evidence, the public behavior of certain market leaders, and my history with corporations. Does not make this a big leap of faith