Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 443 posts

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#81

Post by JorgeGT »

blktiger wrote: post #39
limeblack wrote: post #5

One thing I would love someone to explain is how can people assume cars are going to be automated soon when both planes and trains haven't been automated for various reasons. They are different issues I have gathered but essentially shouldn't trains be dead simple but to this day at least the trains(not metras though) often have someone to stop the train in case of emergencies. Planes are more complex but have lower…

With regards to airplanes, you have several issues. The main one being that airplanes are not equipped with sensors capable of detecting other aircraft nearby. Without a complete picture of the airspace to a very significant distance a fully autonomous aircraft isn't possible. Today that is managed by the air traffic control system which is entirely run by people communicating with other people. That said, aircraft a…

> The main one being that airplanes are not equipped with sensors capable of detecting other aircraft nearby.

Well, there's ACAS/TCAS (airborne collision avoidance system / traffic collision avoidance system) and certainly we are moving towards ASAS (airborne separation assurance system), based mainly in transponder / ADS-B radio signals. But as others have commented, there are other reasons (psychological, economic, etc.).

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#82

Post by devmunchies »

QAPereo wrote: post #65
dperfect wrote: post #57

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

It really makes the insane gamble of the Uber VC's ultimately terminal.

That's what happens when you invest in hype. There's no way we'll be able to hail an autonomous Uber in the next 5 years, which is an eternity in startup land.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#83

Post by ZeroGravitas »

limeblack wrote: post #5

One thing I would love someone to explain is how can people assume cars are going to be automated soon when both planes and trains haven't been automated for various reasons. They are different issues I have gathered but essentially shouldn't trains be dead simple but to this day at least the trains(not metras though) often have someone to stop the train in case of emergencies. Planes are more complex but have lower…

One argument is just scale.

So, if it costs a billion dollars to make a good AI driver, then if you put it in a million cars then it's costs 1000 dollars each and you could eliminate lots of jobs where the main cost is the human (delivery, taxi) so providing a ready sales avenue for your self-driving car (or tech). If you put it in trains then you can maybe drive thousands of trains, and the human is a relatively low cost element of a train service so there's less room to expand.

I don't know if this is true, or even if the logic I outlined above pencils out with real data but it probably contributes in some way.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#84

Post by Robotbeat »

Leader2light wrote: post #15
gboudrias wrote: post #4

I'm sure he's right, but then why is everyone joining the race now? Wouldn't it be way less expensive to wait until at least some of the problems are solved? Also, it sure seems like level 5 autonomous driving is just a few steps short of general AI, which is still lightyears away.

People are joining because Tesla is scaring them into it. Musk is a dumbass, but his idea self-driving is happening now may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Consumers LOVE it. So even having some level of driving assistance will win you more customers.

"Musk is a dumbass, but his idea self-driving is happening now may become a self-fulfilling prophecy."

If you thought about it for like 5 seconds, you just contradicted yourself here.

But your latter point is a good one. Part of what makes Musk effective is, even if he starts with just a half-baked kernel of an idea (usually borrowed from somewhere else), hyping into existence whole new industries (beyond just the companies he controls), which Musk can thus harvest for recruiting and better ideas, which makes those once-silly ideas actually work. That's kind of the opposite of being a dumbass.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#85

Post by chapmindustries »

QAPereo wrote: post #65
dperfect wrote: post #57

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

It really makes the insane gamble of the Uber VC's ultimately terminal.

I strongly disagree. Uber has markets that make money and they release new services all the time. There are ways for them to stay in the black if they scale things back and fine tune different markets.

Someone is going to be the first in self driving cars. Uber has a tremendous demand for them. It would be stupid to not at least be trying to be the first one on the scene.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#86

Post by tyingq »

Eridrus wrote: post #45
limeblack wrote: post #5

One thing I would love someone to explain is how can people assume cars are going to be automated soon when both planes and trains haven't been automated for various reasons. They are different issues I have gathered but essentially shouldn't trains be dead simple but to this day at least the trains(not metras though) often have someone to stop the train in case of emergencies. Planes are more complex but have lower…

If we had autonomous planes it wouldn't significantly reduce cost or increase usage. But there is a lot of investment in autonomous drones. Planes also have a very high safety bar to begin with, which cars do not. Same thing about trains, there's very little value in doing so, and resistance in the form of unions in some locations. Some trains are fully automated though, here's an article with some more info: https:/…

>some dude from Toyota, who don't seem to be very invested in this space, tell me he doesn't think it's going to work isn't very convincing

Similarly, opinions from those heavily invested aren't convincing.

Are there people with credible experience, but without bias either way, that are giving projections on when it might be viable?

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#87

Post by BeStaXP »

I think Toyota exists in a different dimension than the rest of us. Toyota is so convinced that the future of cars is hydrogen that their electric car efforts boil down to a four man team. Dinosaurs! As for self driving tech wasn't there a successful multi manufacturer trans Europe truck convoy last year? Self-driving tech is already at work at mines. Decades? Really, Toyota.

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#88

Post by alphonsegaston »

QAPereo wrote: post #65
dperfect wrote: post #57

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

It really makes the insane gamble of the Uber VC's ultimately terminal.

Maybe for this particular investment, but I'm pretty sure the wider intention was to legitimize business practices where the poor live tenuous lives as an app-directed servant class. Uber made this kind of neo-feudalism so socially acceptable that we now celebrate "Uber-for-X" as "innovation."

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#89

Post by oblio »

dperfect wrote: post #57

I've been saying this for a while. The problem is that people are mostly familiar with the rate of overcoming traditional technical challenges (e.g., making your current computer/phone more compact, improving graphics quality, making cameras and screens with more pixels, etc.). What people don't realize is that full autonomous driving will require more than just faster/smaller/cheaper technical innovation - it will r…

Even better than speech recognition, handwriting recognition.

Hello, Apple Newton, may you rest in peace. I'm not convinced we'll have handwriting recognition within my lifetime, and if we do I imagine that shortly after I'll go looking for Sarah Connor :)

Re: Toyota Research Institute head says full autonomous driving is “not even close”

#90

Post by dreamcompiler »

limeblack wrote: post #5

One thing I would love someone to explain is how can people assume cars are going to be automated soon when both planes and trains haven't been automated for various reasons. They are different issues I have gathered but essentially shouldn't trains be dead simple but to this day at least the trains(not metras though) often have someone to stop the train in case of emergencies. Planes are more complex but have lower…

Planes have been automated to some degree for 100 years. Fully automating a plane at the equivalent of Level 5 is almost a trivial problem compared to doing so with cars. The reason planes aren't automated is mostly social, not technical. Whereas with cars it's decidedly both.
Post reply on HN