In terms of piloting there is very little difference at all. If you can make a computer fly a toy plane, you can make it fly a 747. The only difference is the stakes in a potential crash.
A toy plane crosses a few blocks. A large commercial plane crosses hundreds of miles, massive altitude differences and regularly crosses severe weather and other hazards. The decisions made by a real pilot and situations handled are magnitudes different in scale.
A large commercial plane crosses hundreds of miles, massive altitude differences and regularly crosses severe weather and other hazards.
You realize that even commercial airliners are already on autopilot for almost the entire duration of the majority of their flights, right?
You realize that in bad conditions, the human pilot flies the plane by looking at the instruments in the cockpit, right? And that an AI can pay more precise attention to all of those instruments and respond faster than any human pilot ever could?
The decisions made by a real pilot and situations handled are magnitudes different in scale.
They're not. They're just fucking not. The decisions are the same. The price of failure is higher.
The ONLY reason we still have commercial pilots is because nobody wants their corporate fortune on the line when their AI fails and 250+ people are dead.
They can get away with pilot error, but AI error? They could be blamed for that.
You are not a pilot, I realize that. You have very little to no understanding of what you are talking about regarding flight. Yes, autopilot holds a straight course through clear weather. The pilot still has to put it in and monitor it, the computer will crash the plane if an instrument fails where the pilot can still handle a visual only landing.
Dealing with a hazard, emergency or failure is why a trained pilot is necessary, beyond all the other administrative / conmunication duties that an AI cannot do. In perfect conditions the pilot does not need to correct the autopilot between takeoff and landing, but takeoff and landing are the most difficult and dangerous parts of flight.
There's a big difference between toys and serious commercial aircraft, don't be disingenuous.
In terms of piloting there is very little difference at all. If you can make a computer fly a toy plane, you can make it fly a 747. The only difference is the stakes in a potential crash.
A toy plane crosses a few blocks. A large commercial plane crosses hundreds of miles, massive altitude differences and regularly crosses severe weather and other hazards. The decisions made by a real pilot and situations handled are magnitudes different in scale.
You realize that even commercial airliners are already on autopilot for almost the entire duration of the majority of their flights, right?
You realize that in bad conditions, the human pilot flies the plane by looking at the instruments in the cockpit, right? And that an AI can pay more precise attention to all of those instruments and respond faster than any human pilot ever could?
They're not. They're just fucking not. The decisions are the same. The price of failure is higher.
The ONLY reason we still have commercial pilots is because nobody wants their corporate fortune on the line when their AI fails and 250+ people are dead.
They can get away with pilot error, but AI error? They could be blamed for that.
You are not a pilot, I realize that. You have very little to no understanding of what you are talking about regarding flight. Yes, autopilot holds a straight course through clear weather. The pilot still has to put it in and monitor it, the computer will crash the plane if an instrument fails where the pilot can still handle a visual only landing.
Dealing with a hazard, emergency or failure is why a trained pilot is necessary, beyond all the other administrative / conmunication duties that an AI cannot do. In perfect conditions the pilot does not need to correct the autopilot between takeoff and landing, but takeoff and landing are the most difficult and dangerous parts of flight.
I reiterate: you are not a pilot. QFT.