> The bitter lesson is finally coming for the self-driving cars.

Maybe, but the opacity level of models is not acceptable for cars. "Why did it drive under the semi?" "Model said to." "Why did the model say to?" "shrug"

But if the model is an LLM, you actually COULD ask it why it drove under the semi, and it would give you an answer. Now, you may argue that it will just be generating a whole new, backwards-rationalized post-hoc explanation of its own behavior given the logs that it managed to take before the crash. But then I ask you: how do you think a person explains why they did what they did after a crash? I direct you to all of the unsettling split-brain neuroscience literature demonstrating that humans are incorrigible backwards rationalizers who make for unreliable witnesses.

> Maybe, but the opacity level of models is not acceptable for cars.

That depends on actual performance of the model. I would prefer an opaque model with clearly superhuman driving abilities to a human, or to a non-opaque model with worse performance.