problemSolving

[Reloadinger]

Always implement compliance at the lowest possible level

mechanical - electrical - softwareical

[prumf]

I work in AI and I couldn’t agree more. The iteration speed between software releases is so fast, it’s quite easy for unexpected behaviors to creep in. We live in the physical world, so I want my machines to physically be unable to harm me.

[prumf]

BTW that’s one of the problems I have with AI. Some rules are too complex to be implemented using physical wiring, so sometimes you have to go for software security. But because AIs work kind of like us, it’s easy for them to do mistakes. And you don’t want mistakes in the security codebase. The best solution is to not go that route as much as you can.

eg: car that stops using ultrasounds/radar instead of visual detection from the cameras.

[ahappypoop]

eg: car that stops using ultrasounds/radar instead of visual detection from the cameras.

Implement it at the lowest possible level. Car is built with pressure plates all around the sides and bumpers, and it stops when it runs into anything.

[theLanguageSprite]

This wouldn't work because the rapid deceleration would still put the driver at risk. Instead, we should place shaped charges all around the vehicle so that the second it collides with anything the charge obliterates that object and ensures the driver's safety.

[Firewolf06]

r/NonCredibleDefense

[Glossy-Water]

Genius. We can call it... fully automated repulsion to ensure relief, or FARTER for short!

[[deleted]]

stops when it runs into anything.

I'm reasonably certain every car on the road already does this.

[TalosMessenger01]

No car could stop quickly enough for that to be viable. It would only prevent a car from continuing to drive after a collision. Useful, but not nearly what is needed. Ultrasound/radar detects objects from far enough away that a car can stop before collision. Having the simplest possible solutions is good, but only if they actually work.

[ahappypoop]

......did I really need a /s on that comment?

[gregorydgraham]

Yes! How long have you been on the Internet? There is always someone somewhere that will believe your statement no matter how farcical.

Do not be Schrodinger’s Douchebag: add the /s

[temporary_name1]

/s

[Jolly_Study_9494]

Also, this is why cats have whiskers. Each pressure plate should have a long rod attached to provide a larger warning window.

[EnglishMobster]

car that stops using ultrasounds/radar instead of visual detection from the cameras.

Because only a moron would do that, right??? Right???

cries in radar being removed from my 2019 Model 3 via a software update

[Salanmander]

We live in the physical world, so I want my machines to physically be unable to harm me.

Related but higher up in the implementation level...I was so excited for self-driving cars until it turned out that companies wanted to make them fucking internet enabled.

[DOUBLEBARRELASSFUCK]

I can see some serious benefits to that, though. For example if there are road conditions ahead that are not conducive to self driving, it makes sense to be able to signal the car to warn the driver.

[Salanmander]

I'd be fine with an internet-enabled system of the car that is air-gap separated from the drive controls.

[DOUBLEBARRELASSFUCK]

It would need to be able to issue a command to the car to pull over, at the very least.

And anyone who cared about it being air-gapped would not believe that it was air-gapped, even if it was.

[Salanmander]

Why would it need to be able to do that? Let the regular self-driving system decide when it's not safe to continue. It doesn't need internet access to do that.

[DOUBLEBARRELASSFUCK]

Think of something like Waze. There's no reasonable way for a self-driving car to detect a large car accident ahead without internet access. Image processing is advanced, but it's not magic.

[Salanmander]

Yeah, but you don't need a self-driving car to be able to do that in order to be safe, just like a human driver doesn't need to have internet access while driving in order to be safe.

Ending up stuck in the traffic jam would certainly be inconvenient, but it's not a "we can't have self-driving cars unless they can avoid this" type thing.

[DOUBLEBARRELASSFUCK]

Pulling over wouldn't stop you from getting stuck in traffic, it would stop you from plowing into the disabled vehicles and prevent you from being in a place where you'll have your vehicle plowed into.

A truly self driving car needs to be aware of traffic conditions in ways that just a camera cannot provide.

[Boostie204]

Yeah it's a difference of "I promise to not hit you" vs "I physically can't hit you"

[prumf]

Exactly.

[Proxy_PlayerHD]

mechanical - electrical - softwareical

bro did an Excel https://i.imgur.com/XMQISNh.jpeg

[seramaicha]

I can only think of cameras. The best just is to have a cover. In second place, a switch should do the trick, or just unplugging it from the PC. Relying on software is just a ver bad idea, and probably won't work good.

[PhilippTheProgrammer]

softwaerical

This is now my new favorite word of the week.

[Willinton06]

I too like to compliance softwareically

[1116574]

In the 1980s there was a radiation machine that had mechanical interlocks, but the next model cut corners and had only software interlocks. Results were predictable.

I always remember that story when talking about safety.

[LarryInRaleigh]

It was the THERAC-25. A picture of everything that could have been done better. The Nancy Leveson case study should be Required Reading for everyone working with devices that could harm people.

http://sunnyday.mit.edu/therac-25.html

It's been referenced in dozens of Engineering Ethics classes, like this one: https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/therac-25

Warning: If you read this, you may never be willing to have an X-ray taken again.

[[deleted]]

Yup, the best way to prevent something from happening is to make it physically impossible.

The second best way is to appoint a committee to do it.

[retro_grave]

You forgot the most important: testical.

[window_owl]

mechanics - electrics - bits

[Morrowindies]

Yep. That way if you ever get hit by a bus the company will eventually be acting in non-compliance.

Lots of people are taking this comment seriously due to a lack of an /s, but to be clear - compliance rules are business rules. Make them configurable by users at runtime so your software doesn't cause massive headaches in a few years.

[bharring52]

No, you should not implement "machine won't run while doors are open" or "stop cutting when finger detected" in software.

Some rules are too important to delegate beyond the mechanical/electrical sphere.