> Compared to, say, a large language model that writes news or fiction... an autonomous-driving AI is less subjective and easier to evaluate, so there’s little room for error.

That's brave. What about all the edge cases?

▲

jayd16 3 hours ago | parent [-]

They're talking about verification. Was there a collision or not compared to is this story good.

▲

ShinyLeftPad 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I can think of scenarios that avoid collision in probably 95% of the cases while being bad choices

- Driving through an empty prairie

- Driving slowly through a crowded square, giving people enough time to jump out of the way

▲

MisterKent an hour ago | parent [-]

There's less gray area with driving wss the point. Legal or illegal, efficient or inefficient. And whatever gray area remains is generally "good enough" compared to human drivers on the road.

	▲	ShinyLeftPad an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's easy evaluate if there's no victims. Stats say there's more than 6000 injuries per day and more than 16000 deaths per year on the road. If you choose between hitting a pedestrian and swerving potentially injuring the driver and totaling the car, what would you like the car to pick? Or any given trolley problem variation, etc