Do you not drive using only your eyes? If you are not terrified of the sensors, then software? Turing's central belief was that the human brain was 'just' a computer.
Regards doing things like embedding reflectors in roads and other ways to simplify lane holding, completely agree. But we can't forego the cameras etc that deal with situations that don't contain reflectors.
I suppose you could make ML avoid sharp changes in recognition, but I don't trust the current neural-network models to do so reliably.
This is the same thing..
Also, I'm more worried about temporary, unexpected configuration of things that suddenly make a NN see something weird.
yeah, instead you get hallucinations, muscle twitches, seizures, mental breaks and many more ways a brain can fail to do it's job.
You'd be surprised. All kinds of conditions can do really weird things to your vision. Migraine auras probably being the most common.
If you take the example of Chess, humans and machines play very different styles. Computers replace predictive understanding with excellent memory and fast search.
Similarly for cars, we want to replace the lack of a powerful predictive model with some compensatory mechanism, such as sophisticated sensors. The problem is that, even with faster reaction times, better sensors and fuller awareness, these cars' compensatory abilities against a lack of powerful predictive models are still far from sufficient.
At this point in time, a car with more sensors and failsafes to augment the human against collision is safer than a self-driving car that depends on a lack of lapses of attention. That depends on proper behavior in the customer. Even dividing tasks, with the human controlling the steering (but allowing the car to takeover when highly certain of danger) and the car controlling acceleration would be safer. This set up acknowledges the human propensity to mind wander when attention is not engaged.
Until self-driving cars no longer require human rescue in difficult situations, one can't rightly say that self-driving software are better drivers than humans.
Sure, it's worse in many other ways.
Another thing is that your eyes can last you 100+ years, technology is not that durable and breaks more often, the objectives in cameras get dirty etc.
The cameras typically aren't as good as human eye, for example there are reports where Tesla wanted to jam into a truck in front only because its back in the camera couldn't be differentiated from the sky.
Yes, relying on cameras only is perfectly fine when you play PS4 game, but when life is on the line you want extra safety checks. Kind of like cars have brakes on every wheel and then also a handbrake. How every car has minimum of 3 stop lights (how often you see that one or more lights are bad in other cars?)
Your belief that we have hard AI (and this is kind of indirectly created by companies like Tesla, Google, Amazon, IBM etc) gives you conclusion that just two cameras should be enough in reality we did not made much progress in that area and instead just concentrated on specialized AI that is capable solving specialized problems, that kind of approach absolutely works better with more sensors.
http://i.imgur.com/fk3OvEW.jpg
This situation generated constant lane departure warnings for the driver.
