111–120 of 124 posts
i don't understand how us the public are allowed to read a private conversation. Don't take me wrong i enjoyed reading it, it felt like snooping, but isn't it a blatant privacy violation?
> A source close to Uber’s operations says its engineers watched the intersection where Uber’s cars were said to have run the red light, and that this text refers to them recording a number of normal, human-operated vehicles also breaking the law. Uber has never officially admitted that its software was to blame. is the implication here that that intersection has a lot of red light runners? if so, are they so dense i…
I disagree. A machine might be able to completely verify that it's safe to ignore the light. I wouldn't trust a person to do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know that you were just doing a tl;dr and not necessarily trying to start a discussion about it, but wow, that seems kinda stupid to be coming out of someone who is ostensibly fairly intelligent. A 3D point cloud is great, but with the raw computing power we have these days, image processing should be pretty reliable, at least until LIDAR becomes more. . .well, reliable and affordable. Doesn't the HoloLens just use…
Yes the HoloLens uses IR to map it's environment, however if you move to an area that has a window it throws a caniption fit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't think it was going to stop if the pedestrian stepped out in front? If autonomous cars can't do that, they can't do anything.
Who knows? This Volvo didn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsTxS6tg6xc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes the HoloLens uses IR to map it's environment, however if you move to an area that has a window it throws a caniption fit.
The reason I bring it up is that the HoloLens is pretty limited. Given what I've seen it do with its limited power and the kind of computing power they're putting in Teslas, not to mention the extra sensors (RADAR), it seems more than adequate to perform real-time image processing, even in the short term. That's not even considering what's coming down the pipeline, like fleet learning, the new Nvidia GPUs, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comments come off as if you are more bitter about some company you can just choose to ignore than benchamark is about Travis.
> bitter about some company you can just choose to ignore This is not about some product you buy, or some service you pay for, it's about sharing the road, and whether the other people/entities on the road with you operating multiple thousand pound machines at 24-65 Mph have a legal right to be there and are safe. That's not something you can necessarily "ignore" without consequence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but why would it affect the database lookup that a self-driving car is doing? Who said a self driving car is doing a "database lookup"? If anything, a good self driving car should NOT do any kind of database lookup (of the location of traffic lights etc) and be able to recognize and respond to a moved, impromptu (e.g. because of road work), new, unfamiliar, etc. traffic light.
Getting additional data from a predefined map is expected, even if it's just for something to test the data coming from the sensors. If the car knows there's a traffic light on the map but it isn't 'seeing' one then it should be handing control back to the human, not just carrying on regardless on the assumption that the map is wrong. A level 5 self-driving car would work completely autonomously without any prior kno…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comments come off as if you are more bitter about some company you can just choose to ignore than benchamark is about Travis.
Just had a look at furioussloth's comments. Every single one is an Uber related story and an Uber related comment. Reminder to us all to please declare your interests if you have them. even if it's only: Full disclosure: I quite like Uber. For me, full disclosure, I do actually, quite like Uber. (Although not everything they do, or endorse all their policies or individual employee abhorrent behavior etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything you do that's business related could end up on the front page of the NY Times. I would be extremely careful about what you do on corporate provided phones and email.
Zuckerberg's early days of conversation released didn't seem to hurt him making $40B+ - I always wondered if FB censored/prevented the spread of that information relating to him on FB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> bitter about some company you can just choose to ignore This is not about some product you buy, or some service you pay for, it's about sharing the road, and whether the other people/entities on the road with you operating multiple thousand pound machines at 24-65 Mph have a legal right to be there and are safe. That's not something you can necessarily "ignore" without consequence.
I am only referring to this person's tone being unlike most of the people on this forum. "GROSS" "burn Uber down to ground". It is concerning how angry this person is. Also yes the car ran the signal, it was bad they should be fined and what not. This is not L5 autonomy so the driver is also responsible for not breaking at that signal . Stop making this sound like the car ran over someone or did not stop for pedestri…
Their behavior is so GROSS it's almost illegal.
As for concerning that's funny ... Uber stole my money and laughed, then caused other ppl I know financial harm and then all this stuff comes out in the press about them. I loathe Uber that is all ... no more no less.
Why do you care so much ... what skin in the Uber game do you have?