Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I love these hottakes. Like there are thousands of researchers working tirelessly to resolve the issue in the affirmative or negative, writing papers, giving talks, publishing code, but we should take your word on it harry8 that the emperor has no clothes. How about anything in the way of evidence that what you're saying is insightful? Do you have literally any data to corroborate what you're saying? Because I can go to arxiv and find plenty of papers with validated metrics that contradict diametrically what you're saying.

How many billions of dollars have been spent on self-driving ai tech? How many self-driving cars do we have? How many execs have said we would have self-driving cars in <insert past year here>?

Your thesis seems to be

1) If billions are spent on something and it didn’t already happen, that means it won’t likely happen soon, and

2) If people predict something will happen, and it doesn’t, that means no prediction of that thing can ever be credible.

But those don’t seem like logically sound inferences to me.

You're acting like it's your money they've spent or tax payer money that's been spent? Why does it matter how much has been spent? Is this like some kind of weird entitlement where you get to be upset because companies made aspirational promises (to their shareholders mind you, not to you)

"Look at a stone cutter hammering away at his rock, perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred-and-first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not the last blow that did it, but all that had gone before."

Maybe not the emperor but one of the kings said, after talking with the other kings, that self-driving will come very late if ever, and the things that will come are electric and digitization. I don't even think they have a clear idea of what digitization would actually mean.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact