“It appears that most or all the work at present is much closer to the latter two, and that all of the published numbers are really about the latter two—with no disclosure about how much remote centers are contributing to whatever results we see for efforts at putative self-driving.”
Our reading:
It appears that most or all self-driving work at present is much closer to driver-assist or remotely-assisted driving, and that all published numbers are really about those two, with no disclosure of how much remote centers contribute to the results.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
Marcus presents an impression, introduced by 'It appears'. That qualification governs the statement as a whole. Treating its disclosure clause as an unqualified universal would strengthen his commitment. The supplied rules therefore do not permit a supported or contradicted verdict.
Caveats
- This does not establish whether particular companies disclosed remote assistance or how heavily they relied on it.
Evidence (0 items)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Conditions
- it appears (their words)
- most or all the work at present (their words)
- all of the published numbers (their words)
Where we had to interpret
- The opening 'It appears' qualifies the coordinated statement, including its disclosure clause.
- The latter two categories refer to driver-assist and remotely-assisted driving.
- A factual verdict would require strengthening this tentative impression into a firm assertion. I do not apply the plain-reading exception for firm claims.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
What would settle it
A separate, unhedged statement defining the relevant work or published results could be assessed. Additional evidence cannot remove this statement's hedge.
We found 14 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, Rethinking “driverless cars”, paragraph 8.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-29. The post may have been edited after 2023-11-05.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, Rethinking “driverless cars”
It appears that most or all the work at present is much closer to the latter two, and that all of the published numbers are really about the latter two—with no disclosure about how much remote centers are contributing to whatever results we see for efforts at putative self-driving.
- Where
- paragraph 8
- Published
- 2023-11-05
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.