Live data from Hacker News

Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

medium.com

151–160 of 341 posts

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#151

Let's talk about how we can't make nearly anything "smart" in the world of "IoT" and "smart things". We don't even have a decent robotic lawnmower in 2017 but we want driverless taxis within 10 years? I'm sceptical.

My guess is the people working on driverless cars aren't interested in driverless mower technology -- that is, one industry is cannibalizing the rest.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#152

In an article that has obviously been well thought out and reasoned, it's disappointing to see the author using the current accident rates as reported by self driving car developers as if they were a representative sample and subsequently used as a lemma for further arguments. Simply put, the current rates reported aren't a representative sample. In fact they aren't even naively semi-representative. They are delibera…

Dunno if you live in Silicon Valley, but here in the Mountain View / Sunnyvale area, they absolutely do drive the same miles that humans drive, in the same conditions. There is about the same chance that you'll see a WayMo self-driving car on your trip as that you'll see a VW Bug, perhaps slightly higher. There's a significantly higher chance than seeing a Tesla or McLaren, even though both of those marques are quite popular in Silicon Valley.

They don't do highways yet, but most of the time, I don't either.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#153
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't people still have to get to work during rush hours? I contend that it would be a smoother experience, but would it really be significantly less cars?

Car "could" go pick up kids, groceries at different times.

I am not going to leave the kids at home, hoping they get into the car and off to the daycare centre, so I am assuming you mean before I get to work. So that means I have to wait for the car to get back before I get to work? Wouldn't that just cost me additional fuel? Seems like a bit of a waste to have my car go out twice (or four times if we count both getting to work and home) every weekday.

Isn't this a more likely scenario if the car was leased and/or it was a car pooling thing? But in that case, why are we wasting our times with cars? Why aren't we making buses self-driving? Car pool even more people in one vehicle!

I can imagine a common type of vehicle for self-driving cars that will be popular would be 'small buses', ones that carry 8-12 people, that drive unique routes.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#154
post #35

I dislike the idea of transportation as a service. I would much rather own a self driving car and use it as a mobile office. Being able to get work done during my commute would be a major benefit. I imagine having a full size monitor with a nice keyboard and mouse that I would leave in the car. That simply wouldn't be possible with a service like Uber.

I expect the option to own a self-driving car instead of taking taxis will exist, and various people it will be worthwhile (e.g. people in more remote areas). However, I expect this to be quite a bit more expensive overall, and I think a lot of people might not care so much about owning a vehicle once they see that cost difference.

Maybe you could lease your self driving car to self drive others around and pay for it that way...

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Factually that may be true, but its a matter of belief. When I drive, I am 100% confident that I will not get into an accident. A self driving car with <100% safety is a net loss in my mind.

If you are 100% confident that you won't have an accident, you're deluding yourself. Unexpected phenomena like an animal crossing the road, a drunk or reckless driver driving against traffic or barging in from an intersection where you have the priority, etc. can get anyone.

If you are 100% confident that you won't have an accident, you're deluding yourself.

So? That's something humans tend to do, and anyone trying to sell self-driving cars will have to account for it.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#156
post #19

I find it odd the way people talk about moving through the levels sequentially without really acknowledging there's a massive phase change that happens somewhere between level two and four, where a self-driving car could easily be way more dangerous than the average human driver. That comes as soon as you have a situation where the automation has to be able to handle all foreseeable scenarios without failing because…

I think we will soon be in a situation where self driving cars are better than humans for 10% of driving scenarios(highway, gridlock commute, some parking, ...) but nearly useless in others. I think the acceptance for half decent AI will be much lower than it is for poor human drivers, and the hardest parts of autonomous driving is still a very long way out. That's probably fine though, if the automation can reliably…

Ubers and transport trucks can do fixed routes, so that should be relatively easy to automate.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#157
post #16
post #10

> Level by level or straight to level five? This strikes me as a slightly strange question. Maybe it's just an excuse to present the six level system as a framework for thinking about it, but a huge chunk of commodity new cars on the market this year are level 2. A small chunk of higher end cars are level 3. Teslas are arguably level 4, and we all know there are level 4 & 5 cars on the road around the bay and few oth…

AFAIK there are no cars yet that are _truly_ levels 4 or 5. Both Google and Tesla's cars strive towards that goal, but SAE level 4 requires that the system perform ["all aspects of the dynamic driving task, _even if a human driver does not respond appropriately to a request to intervene_"][1]. (Emphasis mine.) So until you can fall asleep at the wheel without endangering yourself or other passengers, neither of those…

Well, Waymo's car drove a legally blind man as the only passenger: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/bli...

So it seems like they're pretty close to L4.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#158

"If it’s true that algorithms are statistically better than drivers then we shouldn’t let people to drive. But there are still a lot of people that love to drive. This can be a fun recreational activity but we just don’t need those people on the road." I don't know who "we" is in that sentence, but thanks for making the decision for everyone. "we" as a society also absolutely don't need smokers, drinkers and people w…

And banning self-driving also is a convenient way for totalitarians to control the movement of the population. Of course we never hear about that around here.

And aliens could come from space and take over our planet. What's your point?

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#159
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would much rather you didn't place so emphasis on the control premium. The cumulative effect of everybody pursuing their self interest with no regard for the sanctity of our shared spaces has been resoundingly bad. It's the tragedy of the commons in a nutshell. With personal automobiles we've already completely jumped the shark. People travel from all over the world to visit cities like Paris, but I can't think of…

Hm, to me the "on demand" economy, which Uber and the like are part of, is the ultimate pursuit of self-interest. The entire model is built on getting exactly what you want when you want it, with no downsides. Once there are robot cars there is no longer a limit to how many cars can be on the road. Imagine one car zipping around for every Amazon delivery, 24 by 7.

But ultimately, it also means you can share perfectly. I don't need to own a hammer if I can get one exactly when I need it.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#160
post #99
post #19

I find it odd the way people talk about moving through the levels sequentially without really acknowledging there's a massive phase change that happens somewhere between level two and four, where a self-driving car could easily be way more dangerous than the average human driver. That comes as soon as you have a situation where the automation has to be able to handle all foreseeable scenarios without failing because…

Imagine some drunk guy hops into his car in bad weather. He taps the auto-cruise button and then passes out. Snow, rain, construction, - something - hinders the ride somewhere along the way home. Car cannot process the issue correctly, and slows to a stop, alerting the driver. Driver, being sound asleep, cannot hear the annoying alert tone. Alert continues, and possibly after some time, alerts authorities of it's dis…

NVIDIA actually talks about this in their last series of talks. The car when planning the drive makes a determination of whether or not it expects driver assist and how much. Of course a drunk person could just check off the sure, I can drive for those sections and then pass out anyway.
Post reply on HN