• flerp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’m not sure if that was supposed to be in agreement or countering what I said.

    Over the past few decades, some people have noticed and commented on the enormous death toll that our reliance on driving and the vast amount of driving hours spent on our roads and said that that amount of death is unacceptable. Nothing has ever been able to come of it because of that aforementioned reliance on driving that our society has. Human nature cannot be the thing that changes, we can’t expect humans to behave differently all of a sudden nor change their ability to focus and drive safely.

    But this moment in time, when the shift from human to machine drivers is happening, the time when we shift from beings incapable of performing better on a global scale, to machines able to avoid the current death tolls due to their ability to be vastly more precise than humans, this is the time to reduce that death toll.

    If we allow companies to get away with removing sensors from their cars which results in lower safety just so that said company can increase their bottom line, I consider that unacceptable even if the death toll is slightly lower than human driven cars if it could be greatly lower than human driven cars.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      One company says they can build FSD with 15 sensors and sensor fusion. Another company says they can build FSD with just cameras. As I see it, the development path doesn’t matter, it’s the end result that matters.