Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 98
4/20/2025, 12:11:10 AM
X
In reply to:
Edan Maor
@edanm
·
70d
@lmldias @GaryMarcus @shaunralston Let me explain, I say "with potential" because assuming it's cost-effective on a per-city basis, then even if it doesn't ever get to full autonomous driving on e.g. a highway, just deploying it in hundreds of cities is a huge deal.

That's why it's not "just a demo" IMO.
Luís Dias
@lmldias
·
70d
@edanm @GaryMarcus @shaunralston If you call it "with potential", then Marcus can call it "demos".

Come on man. Get a clue.
Edan Maor
@edanm
·
70d
@GaryMarcus @shaunralston Not sure about point 1, that can change things.

About 2, I agree they're not as general purpose as people expected, but it's still a lot more than a demo IMO.

It falls short of promises made, but it's also a bigger deal than many realize, with potential to be transformative.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
70d
@edanm @shaunralston 1. They still require an unknown number of humans in the background for remote operations
2. They allegedly require enormously detailed, specialized maps; new cities require an enormous amount of city-specific prep
3. They are demos in the sense that you can’t just drop them in a
Edan Maor
@edanm
·
70d
@GaryMarcus @shaunralston Aren't driverless cars operating in production in some cities? While it's definitely not mass adoption, I also don't think it's fair to call it just a demo.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
70d
@shaunralston Also we have made progress on driverless cars for 40 years but they are still demos.

The statement is part of a public discourse on the economic viability and deployment of driverless cars, engaging in a debate about their cost-effectiveness and potential impact on society.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and focuses on providing factual information about the financial aspects of driverless cars. [+1]
  2. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the financial challenges of deploying driverless cars, contributing to the ongoing dialogue without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement responsibly uses the platform to discuss a public issue, contributing to the discourse on the economic implications of driverless car technology. [+1]