• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    ·
    2 days ago

    Don’t shift the blame to bright ad boards or similar external factors. If the device can’t deal with it, it does not belong in that environment.

    • log@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      No no, let’s put the blame on bright ad boards, and require cities to remove that form of advertisement. You know, for safety.

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      That’s the same reasoning that forced pedestrians out of basically every roadway

      Have we considered modern urban design is terrible for pedestrians? Humans make this same mistake with regularity. We’re only able to cross roads at specific places and times that are solely designed around cars

      But no, we’ll keep blaming all the people who get hit for it, as well as all the robots. Couldn’t possibly be bad design that neither humans nor robots can consistently safely cross

      • nyan@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Completely separate discussion. Making accommodations to keep living humans safe is good and reasonable. (Keep in mind that in the pre-automobile era, there was no safe way to cross a busy street—you stepped out and hoped you didn’t get run down by a horse.) But a robot is a tool, not a person, and changes that make traffic easier to navigate for robots may be even more unhelpful for human pedestrians than the current status quo.