The idea that bad people (be it trolls, criminals or spooks) could force deliberate malfunctioning of/misclassifications in AIs and thus cause crashes
I wish people would stop trotting this one out. Bad actors can deliberately cause humans to crash just as easily if not moreso. If they don't, it's only because such behavior is punishable.
Ah, yes, the ethical murderer who only wants to fuck up just that one car but who sincerely worries about the other drivers on the road. That's the demographic you're concerned about? So how does indiscriminately trying to trick generally available systems specifically target only one person without risking other drivers?
If you're interested in replying in a condescending manner and attacking strawmen arguments I never made, be my guest, but I have no desire to further discuss this with you.
Comments
I wish people would stop trotting this one out. Bad actors can deliberately cause humans to crash just as easily if not moreso. If they don't, it's only because such behavior is punishable.
Making somebody crash in a dumb car is pretty hard if you want to do it in an undetectable manner with minor to no risk to yourself or anybody else.
Glitching an AI on the other hand e.g. by holding up a sign is less risky for yourself, and less detectable.
That's not true even allowing for your next constraints, one of which I find to be quite absurd.
In the advanced technological case, you have https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/21/9009213/chrysler-uconnect...
In the non-advanced technological case, you can drop caltrops behind your vehicle as you drive and no one would know it was you.
"But that only happens in cartoons" - Yes, because most people are not cartoon villains. And yet, look, kids throwing rocks, no AI necessary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Interstate_75_rock-throwi...
Ah, yes, the ethical murderer who only wants to fuck up just that one car but who sincerely worries about the other drivers on the road. That's the demographic you're concerned about? So how does indiscriminately trying to trick generally available systems specifically target only one person without risking other drivers?
If you're interested in replying in a condescending manner and attacking strawmen arguments I never made, be my guest, but I have no desire to further discuss this with you.
I'll just talk to myself then, because, while I understand you feeling hurt by my comment, I did not attack a strawman.
Not true. (I gave examples.)
Still not true. (Same examples.)
Still not true. (Same examples.)
Still not true. (This is absurd. Also the same examples still apply.)