- cross-posted to:
- enshitification@slrpnk.net
- cross-posted to:
- enshitification@slrpnk.net
You must log in or # to comment.
8,750 salaries worth of money betting AI can do this with no actual evidence it can.
Hopefully there are others who can speak with more knowledge on this.
Isn’t one of the problems that aircraft don’t have consistent, modern transponders so that they can be reliably seen by the towers? I think that was part of the DC crash between passenger plane and helicopter, no? ATC didn’t have good visibility of the helicopter, so they told the plane and the helicopter to just watch out for each other visually.
I don’t see AI helping all that much until all aircraft are retrofitted with modern transponders.
ATC could see both of them no problem, but ATC is often overloaded and will pawn off responsibility to the pilots to maintain separation.
Legally speaking, the controller in that accident did their job correctly. The helicopter pilots assured the controller multiple times that they would pass behind the jet.
The current hot topic is ADSB IN. Most aircraft are required to have ADSB OUT these days, but very few aircraft (especially airliners) have recievers to display that info.
It’s direct, line of site communication from aircraft to aircraft. Exact position in relation to each other, right on your nav display.
My understanding is that it’s an upgrade to the current situational awareness provided by TCAS. TCAS is wonderful but broke down in the DCA crash because [I don’t remember the real reason so I’d just be guessing here]. TCAS should have saved the day, but there was something missing (probably the helicopter transponder wasn’t “participating” in the TCAS conversation that airplanes usually have (the TCAS computers, not the pilots)).
Would ADSB IN have helped prevent DCA? Yes, assuming the helicopter had it they would have had better situational awareness. If the helicopter had their transponder turned off, though, it’s not clear to me if they would be broadcasting ADSB for the airliner to see.
Lot of things didn’t go right in that crash. Mentour Pilot has a really good video on the subject.
My initial reaction was “well that’s gonna end badly”. But then I realised they are probably not talking about generative AI. ML approaches can be pretty useful for optimisation, so this might not be as bad as it sounds. Really depends on what the actual technology is and what purpose it’s being put to…
Nope, I’m almost certain they mean the same LLMs they use for anything else. If they are using grok in intelligence and military you think they won’t for this?
What are you basing that on? The article has some open speculation, but says it’s not known.
LLMs make no sense in this context. It’s not like they’re writing a report every time a plane comes in to land
That should go swimmingly
Only if there’s a body of water near the terminal.
so yes!
Well, honestly, this might be one of the use cases where these “AI” tools could be useful. Pattern recognition is something they are actually great at accomplishing. That said, I am still skeptical and concerned that the algorithms are being designed and deployed mindfully.
this will not work with ATC, or even cars in general too many things can go wrong.
we can’t even get self driving cars right yet, I’m not sure ATC is going to be any better. 99% reliability will probably be easy, it’s that last 1% that could take decades to fix.
It’s one of those things that can absolutely be done with care, effort, and money. But we lack a government that will put any of those toward the project. And the private sector will actively undermine it to scrape a few more pennies off the top.
We’ve had self flying and landing planes for years though. You can’t really compare controlled airspace to the chaos that is operating on the ground.
I’m still skeptical they won’t fuck it up, but this should be a manageable problem for ai.
Yet pilots still fly and land manually. And if those systems work so well why haven’t we had self-controlling air traffic for years too?
We’ve had self flying and landing planes for years though
Because none of it relies on any kind of AI. It doesn’t have to make decisions, it just flies programmatically. If you commanded it to fly into the ground it would (has, Germanwings crash). Autopilot wont even respond to a collision avoidance resolution advisory.
That’s different than AI tho
That’s an example of a computer being utilized in the way ut should be (with predictable outcomes
Determinism is one of the greatest properties of a computer and should be the gold standard of any program. Guess what LLMs fundamentally can’t do?
Make a profit?
People don’t realize that LLMs are not computers.
LLMs are software that turns a computer (an incredibly powerful tool of reliability and precision) into an imitation of a room temperature IQ person who thinks they’re an infallible genius because they can search google.
Well, here’s hoping they are in charge of Air Force One.
I don’t see ANY comments in here where it’s clear that people read the fucking article.
“Har har, AI and ATC, I’ll make a funny joke about flying will be unsafe”. Yes, it’s expected, but if you actually read what this is - it’s going to issue predictions about how busy particular times are, basically.
ZERO use of the AI in the tower by ATC to control aircraft in any way.
Sure, they might try to introduce such a thing - at which time your jokes will actually apply!
I don’t see ANY comments in here where it’s clear that people read the fucking article.
Average Lemmy user: Get baited into a headline about AI and immediately bitch about how it’s the worst thing in the world. No nuance, no legitimate discussion about the issues, just rage.
It definitely seems like the 100% anti-AI NO MATTER WHAT people hold the majority. heh. Which is only annoying every so often, as I mostly agree with them. Just not totally agree. heh
There are a small number of cases where the current batch of AI tools are ok and fine. Certainty is the enemy, as per usual.
That’s only step one. Just wait.
I can at least live with your comment. lol.
I don’t necessarily disagree, but we’re certainly not there yet - on this particular front.
it’s going to issue predictions about how busy particular times are, basically.
and for that it’s somehow worth $875M.
In theory, an automated system should be able to outperform humans at a rote task like this under the right conditions. However, I don’t imagine throwing LLMs in the mix without redesigning the whole system for automation is going to end well.
You’re absolutely right to push back, I should have landed that plane before it ran out of fuel. Would you like me to explore options for funerals?
The fuel is the load bearing component of the equation.
Worth stating plainly: arrival at the airport is gated on the fuel quantity being more than zero.
Or at least being within glide capability. Would you like me to calculate a glide ratio for your current flight configuration?
You have been added to the Best of Lemmy: https://sh.itjust.works/post/67115517
I generated a letter to the loved ones. Let me know if you want it to be less personal:
I hope this letter finds you well. Yesterday’s plane crash wasn’t just a terrible accident—it was a horrible mistake…
I think they should test it out on the private jets first. Ya know, to make sure it all works great.
Is this an LLM style AI, or a machine learning AI.
If it’s a LLM, it’s not worth a penny
If it’s a true machine learning AI, then I can see the worth of it.
Welp, I’m never flying again. And fuck my house is in a main flight path.
If you’re in a main flight path you will be safe.
“It looks like I may have confused the available freeway lanes for a designated runway. Did you know I405 contains 523,000 times more asphalt than LAX? I will work on securing an additional freeway for future landings and I have prepared a list of new flight paths.”
FAA describes the SMART system
The media and old boomers are going to love talking about this system the moment a plane crashes.
Young tech savvy people on Lemmy will embrace this system with open arms.
No, that’s just them signalling not to land there.
Ah yes, the same technology that was used to kill 123 Iranian school children
“You were right to push back - that runway was in fact occupied”
We’re fucked.
