[robxorb]

You could level similarly-contrived criticisms against humans where machines could do better too. Of course there will be edge-cases either way - the question is the overall balance, which tips further towards machines each day.

In the future, vehicles could have their FSD augmented by direct comms with each other, in a trustless way. If the entire traffic network ended up interconnected, it'd behave as a single system, approaching 100% self-awareness.

Obviously, no ordinary human drivers could get anywhere near that level of situational awareness, nor ability to coordinate in parallel. All they have is a small cone of vision/hearing, a bit of sensor augmentation, and little else.

[tw04]

>In the future, vehicles could have their FSD augmented by direct comms with each other, in a trustless way. If the entire traffic network ended up interconnected, it'd behave as a single system, approaching 100% self-awareness.

We can't get Amazon and Microsoft to agree on a single object-storage standard, and you think you're going to get every major auto manufacturer, including ones regulated by opposing nations to agree on an automobile communication standard? That who controls? And it won't be considered a national security risk to allow a foreign manufacturer to be able to potentially gridlock the entire traffic pattern(s) of a nation?

>All they have is a small cone of vision/hearing, a bit of sensor augmentation, and little else.

Which literally no amount of compute power has been able to replicate or surpass to date.

Right....

[robxorb]

I'm not suggesting next year, or even next decade. But it will happen. You think profit-driven, hierarchical, centralised, closed and proprietary non-interoperable systems are our future? Novel idea! Best of luck with it.

[krger]

> You could level similarly-contrived criticisms against humans where machines could do better too.

You’re not even going to build an actual strawman before claiming to have knocked it down?