# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 23
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/nmp7vkq
@abucci da fuq?! Tell us more! š
@abucci da fuq?! Tell us more! š
@prologic me? Man, Tesla has been a con from day 1. They barely ship any cars. One quarter, they made all their reported profits from bitcoin sales. It's never going to be able to compete with the major car companies who are releasing electric vehicles now, and it seems to me that Tesla all along was about a narcissistic publicity play + a play to secure battery components and supply chains. They put an "autopilot" feature into the cars suggesting that they are self-driving, but then after a bunch crashed and killed/injured people, they walked that back a bit (but not completely) and are now rightfully facing scrutiny. There are reports that when the batteries get low, the car's controls lock up, even if the car is moving 70 mph down a highway! It's like, they're not even real cars, they're toys that shouldn't be on the road!
@abucci Interesting... See I really don't know anything about Tesla cars really š
@abucci Interesting... See I really don't know anything about Tesla cars really š
@prologic I'll have to see if I can dig it up, but I watched a YouTube video once of a stunt driver driving a Tesla through a test track. He'd driven all sorts of different cars, and his assessment of the Tesla was "it sucks" (he didn't say it like that, that's my interpretation). It also made him dizzy, apparently, which I've seen here and there from Tesla drivers.
My wife took an Uber once that was a Tesla and she said the interior felt cheap lol
Anyway, a few years ago it dawned on me that Musk is a con artist, and ever since then I look at everything he does through that lens. It rarely steers me wrong. He does things to enrich himself and his reputation, and he doesn't care who he hurts in the process. So, Tesla is not a car company, it's a con. SpaceX is a real space company, but he conned his way into being associated with it even though he's barely involved in it. The Boring Company was a con. Even his hair is a con. Etc.
Iām not sure why people are upset by autopilot deaths when cars in USA alone kill something like 3000 people per month š¤
actually is a good remark @will, the question is statistically who is the most dangerous :
an autopilot or a human ?
actually is a good remark @will, the question should be : statistically who is the most dangerous :
an autopilot or a human ? Do you think that there is a open data with the information of brand car and accident is has been involved on ?
actually is a good remark @will, the question is statistically who is the most dangerous :
an autopilot or a human ? Do you think that there is a open data with the information of brand car and accident is has been involved on ?
@tkanos @will (a) the Tesla autopilot has killed people no human would have mistakenly killed; (b) no computer program can make moral decisions, and we should not be moving in the direction of placing trust into machines to do so--the act of trying to offload such decisions is itself an immoral act; (c) it's possible computer vision will never be good enough to drive a car, because driving a car is probably "AI Complete" (meaning a task that requires artificial general intelligence to perform).
The fact that people die in car wrecks is therefore not an argument in favor of self-driving cars. It's an argument in favor of public transportation, safety regulations, training, etc.
@tkanos no, it's not a statistical problem. At all. And it is unethical to think so, so please be careful.
The statistic doesn't solve the main issue, but they are necessary to discuss the question. I like statistic because its not about believe. If we have those statistics, we will be more prepare to discuss those questions, without data I can only debate the subject by believe and not rationally.
Let's say we compute the data and we found out that autopilot (that I personally hate btw) are more safe because human can get tired, distracted, emotionally disturbed, drunk, in drugs .....
I will be more able to discuss the issue that maybe is not authorizing/forbidding autopilot on itself,
but if you will drive and you don't feel you can do it, but you still want want/need to go somewhere with you car, please do it on autopilot.
The statistic doesn't solve the main issue, but they are necessary to discuss the question. I like statistic because its not about believe. If we have those statistics, we will be more prepare to discuss those questions, without data I can only debate the subject by believe and not rationally.
Let's say we compute the data and we found out that autopilot (that I personally hate btw) are more safe because human can get tired, distracted, emotionally disturbed, drunk, in drugs .....
I will be more able to discuss the issue that maybe is not authorizing/forbidding autopilot on itself,
but if you will drive and you don't feel you can do it, but you still want/need to go somewhere with you car, please do it on autopilot.
@tkanos you can't apply statistics to moral questions any more than you can milk a cow with a communications satellite.
I'm sorry i;m a bit confused , I think we are talking of different things. Which is the moral question you are talking about ?
I'm sorry I'm a bit confused, I think we are talking of different things. What is the moral question you are talking about ?
I'm sorry I'm a bit confused, I think we are talking of different things. Which is the moral question you are talking about ?
@tkanos how to drive your car under dangerous circumstances where others might be harmed is a moral question.
There was the issue of whether there was some way to measure statistically whether having a computer drive your car instead is somehow better. But, unless the computer is orders of magnitude safer, which it is not at this time and will not be any time soon, the question is a category error.
It's a category error because you can't answer a moral question with statistics. People try constantly but that doesn't make it right.
@abucci Oh even I got a bit confused here until I realized we're talking about three (at least) different things in this yarn š
Yes the moral question is tough.
> Should Tesla have ever tested autopilot in conditions that have / had the potential to cause harm to others.
Hmmm? š¤ No (IMO)
@abucci Oh even I got a bit confused here until I realized we're talking about three (at least) different things in this yarn š
Yes the moral question is tough.
> Should Tesla have ever tested autopilot in conditions that have / had the potential to cause harm to others.
Hmmm? š¤ No (IMO)
Still a bit unsure but I guess you have a good point here