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

Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 236 posts

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#31

Post by samstave »

soared wrote: post #16

Wow. FYI - This is how you mess up content marketing. If the author genuinely wanted me to read the article and get to know the brand, he shouldn't have used such a scummy title. Yes, the article is /technically/ true. But they are only talking about the hardware, and acknowledge in the second paragraph that they don't have the software. So while the title implies self-driving cars are a solved problem, they are real…

>>>Titles like these are what happen when marketers optimize everything towards clicks, and don't care about actual impact on the brand itself.

Uh, you say this as if you truly think that this is NOT the actual premise of marketing.

https://youtu.be/DFCMhSzeGuA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbAAVLcMzr4

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#32

Post by aianus »

mabbo wrote: post #25

Call me when it's for sale, when I can put down money and drive away (or rather, be driven away by) a self diving car. Seriously though. Please call me when that happens. I really, really want to not have to drive anymore. I don't care what the price tag is.

What's stopping you from taking an Uber everywhere?

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#33

Post by mikeyouse »

infecto wrote: post #12
swsieber wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For now, there will still be a human behind the wheel." Yup. Total click bait.

What is not clear is if this is due to the legal limitations or limitation of automation?

It's harder to assess the state of the technology from the outside, but this is due at very least to legal limitations -- It's currently illegal to have a car on the road without a human.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#35

Post by arosier »

From my discussions with a friend with intimate knowledge of the software side of Cruise, there is wild skepticism within the co that they even have the hardware needed to go L4 or L5. Big promises being made to GM by Kyle which is leading to smoke and mirrors to distract/buy time from more critical problems "under the hood."

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#36

Post by Fricken »

felippee wrote: post #17
Fricken wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, they're pretty close. Late this year or 2018 they'll have cars driving around empty. GM has consistently been underestimated by the public, but they've played their cards very well. It's in no small part due to the drive and leadership of Kyle Vogt, who is on his way to the big leagues to join the ranks of Musk, Bezos, and Jobs and those guys.

Once they actually have cars driving empty we will actually learn how close or how far are they. I've seen a lot of PR muscle flexing from big companies before and no longer believe any such stuff. They do that to impress investors and the public, but this has nothing to do with reality.

This PR announcement isn't the only data point, GM has the goods to back it up.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#37

Post by InitialLastName »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #29
andys627 wrote: post #11

>Electric self-driving cars will save millions of lives and significantly accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, but only when they’re deployed in large numbers. Just like cars that we drive, self driving cars enable sprawl. Sprawl will never be environmentally sustainable. We need cities that you move through by foot, bike, and public transit.

> Sprawl will never be environmentally sustainable. Assuming clean, renewable energy powers all electric mobility, why not? I do not want to live in a city/urban area, and I will pay more not to. EDIT: @InitialLastName Sorry, HN throttling kicked in, can't reply to your reply so I'm putting this here. If I have a well for water, septic for sewage, solar on my roof, and a gravel road to town, what's the problem? I und…

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason...

Have a look at the graph of the cost of delivering utilities. This isn't about environmental sustainability as much as long-term economic sustainability.

When towns sprawl, utilities with costs that scale with distance cost more per person.

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#38

Post by 1_2__4 »

antirez wrote: post #4

I don't know what to believe. A few days ago I spent some time checking publicly available data and the result is that the current state of art is extremely far from an autonomous car that, could like used to drive a taxi in a busy city like Rome. Not far as "still some effort needed" but potentially "not clear when this could be available" far. Now there are those claims made by multiple companies... Go figure.

Maybe stop believing what companies say and start looking for third-party evidence that they're telling the truth

Re: Cruise's 3rd generation self-driving car

#40

Post by bryananderson »

andys627 wrote: post #11

>Electric self-driving cars will save millions of lives and significantly accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, but only when they’re deployed in large numbers. Just like cars that we drive, self driving cars enable sprawl. Sprawl will never be environmentally sustainable. We need cities that you move through by foot, bike, and public transit.

Why do people believe that public transportation does not enable sprawl?

A great commuter rail system is what allows people who work in the world's premiere cities to live in strip-mall exurbs and take the train to work.

I live in Washington, DC. Metro is what allows huge numbers of people to live in sprawling suburbs instead of in the city. Yes, some drive, but traffic is rough and would be unbearable without Metro. Fewer people would be able to live outside the dense city center.

Post reply on HN