101–110 of 411 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's approach is cautious, however has Tesla been reckless?
googles cars have gotten in a few fender benders and side swipes people have died using teslas autopilot
That is more cautious, but that doesn't, on its own, suggest better tech. That is that the Google cars are actually safer, more advanced, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a lot of respect for Waymo's approach to this. While Tesla and Uber have both just recklessly (imo) jumped in and started setting loose self driving cars and making bold claims, Google/Waymo has really taken a slow and measured approach and given great care to making sure their cars are actually safe.
Uber and Tesla have had to play catch-up to Waymo. This kind of approach is reckless but also is run-before-crawl. The outfall is that it led to bad PR for self-driving cars.
Bad PR? Example? I haven't seen much negative spin on self-driving cars in mainstream coverage recently. If anything it's been highly optimistic while still being honest by mentioning the difficulties the companies are trying to overcome.
I don't think people are under-estimating the challenge here, even the layman. But the potential ROI when it does work would dramatically be safer, environmentally friendly, and efficient with human time.
Given the current state of driving is highly dangerous, we'd benefit from iterative progress towards self-driving cars, ala what Tesla is doing. Controlling risks doesn't have to mean holding tech back until it's perfected.
After seeing the movie Logan, I was curious if the movie was taking a jab at the autonomous vehicle trend by portraying them as a danger to ma & pa drivers on the highway. It showed a crowded highway full of shipping containers pushing a truck hauling horses off the road. It seems the message was not that the technology can't be courteous, but that once it's accepted, corporations will abuse the roads to help their b…
By all accounts, autonomous vehicles will be much safer than human drivers. Companies will be sued up the ass if they program their vehicles to take risks and end up killing people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is kind of funny, because every pilot knows the limitation of each kind of autopilot. I think a lot of it is public expectation of that kind of name.
Right, and if drivers read ALL of the fine print of Tesla Autopilot, they would have been informed of the limitations of that system as well. The problem comes when the Large Print promises things that the system does not do. Another problem came from the implementation of the system where Tesla did not verify that the driver maintains hands on the wheel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a computer crashes, you can identify the software or hardware flaw that caused the crash and fix it once and for all. Improving human driving skills collectively is much more difficult. Even if one driver learns from their own mistake, other drivers and the next generation of drivers will still be just as prone as before to make that mistake. Better education can only do so much anyway, since people often don't th…
> If a computer crashes, you can identify the software or hardware flaw that caused the crash and fix it once and for all. Right. Except that 40 years later computers still crash. The more complex a system the harder it becomes to debug and there is no complex software system without bugs. It's like rocks in a field, you'll never get the last one out even if you think you did.
That would be pretty amazing. Why they are sticking shit all over 2 ton vehicles? If they are solving Fuel and Emissions and Driver, can't they just take the final step of a revolution? I am pretty sure governments would be throwing notes at it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a computer crashes, you can identify the software or hardware flaw that caused the crash and fix it once and for all. Right. Except that 40 years later computers still crash. The more complex a system the harder it becomes to debug and there is no complex software system without bugs. It's like rocks in a field, you'll never get the last one out even if you think you did.
And 100 years later humans still do stupid things in traffic (not to mention they also "crash" - fall asleep, get strokes, whatever). Why does a computer driver have to be flawless when human drivers are anything but?
And that's not a simple thing: it will have to be better than humans in every situation, just being better in some but clearly worse in others will still end up looking bad for self driving cars. People don't deal in statistics, they simply look at the situation and say 'that would never happen to a human' and will keep on driving themselves.
So it's a very fine line to roll this sort of thing out, do it too early and you end up turning off your potential early adopters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uber is also getting their pants sued off by Google for selling self driving car trade secrets. A suit that Uber is more than likely going to lose.
s/selling/stealing/ (or maybe buying?); Levandowski allegedly stole data when he left Google, and brought it to Otto, which is now owned by Uber.
Is Waymo clear about what the end goal is? I can't tell if they plan to launch an Uber like service, or a direct-to-consumer lease type service, or just to be suppliers (whole vehicles, components like lidar, software) to companies like Uber. Or maybe they are leaving all of that undecided for now? I'm not sure this rider trial thing strongly signals any of them. You would want real world end-customer experiences reg…
I wonder this about autonomous cars in general from any company. They're cool tech and in Europe, they can really help solve several last leg problems and cut down on car ownership (I really don't think people should be able to own self driving cars. They really need airplane style maintenance for sensors and companies need to work together so all fleets have the latest safety and security updates). However I don't r…
It might be better to think of it as an investment in public health rather than public transportation. Preventing the huge number of deaths caused by human drivers is more important than speeding up traffic.