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

161–170 of 236 posts

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

#161

Post by RivieraKid »

mabbo wrote: post #21
rwmj wrote: post #3

There are a lot of big claims in this article. As someone who hasn't been paying much attention, is it credible that they have a near-ready-to-go self-driving car right now?

They've got some damn impressive videos on YouTube. I think they're either neck and neck with, or possibly ahead of, Tesla.

Tesla is the leader leader in terms of released driver-assist technology. But they're years behind in the full-self-driving game. They're no way near where Waymo is now (and most likely Cruise, Drive.ai, maybe others).

Their in-house developed Autopilot v2 is still worse than the third-party (MobileEye) Autopilot v1 they got rid of last year.

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

#162

Post by alkonaut »

gervase wrote: post #15
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.

Based on my own observations, there's probably a big difference between operating as a taxi in Berlin and Rome, and another between operating in Rome and Mumbai. This only factors in other human drivers and infrastructure design/signage, not weather conditions (a different can of worms). I suspect that we'll see a progression like: 1) Well-regulated urban and highway environments 2) Well-regulated rural environments…

Agree. And "will regulated" also probably includes a climate similar to what's found in e.g California.

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

#163

Post by Animats »

tigershark wrote: post #146
Animats wrote: post #110

So GM engineering got the hardware integrated with the vehicle and engineered it for assembly line production. That's what GM engineering does. Whether the Cruise software is good enough for self-driving without driver attention remains to be seen. Volvo is doing well with their self-driving car, but admits the hardware cost is over $100K per car at present.

I don't really believe it is possible. Lidars were the most expensive part and are much, much cheaper now, I can't really imagine how can they spend more than 100k$ of self driving hardware per car.

There still are not cheap, good, 3D, automotive-grade LIDAR units. 2-3 years out, though, there should be lots of them.

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

#164

Post by macandcheese »

mholt wrote: post #132
maxerickson wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computers are so much better at detecting traction problems that electronic stability control is mandatory in most new vehicles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control#R...

Cool. But sometimes the road is just plain impassable. And having grown up in many Iowa winter blizzards, I still don't trust even electronic systems. They help, but sometimes there's nothing you can do when there's basically no friction.

Right? There is no better teacher than driving through a few brutal upstate New York winters to teach one how to drive in the elements. No WAY am I trusting a car more than my own abilities to do so.

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

#165

Post by mulmen »

antirez wrote: post #41
gervase wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on my own observations, there's probably a big difference between operating as a taxi in Berlin and Rome, and another between operating in Rome and Mumbai. This only factors in other human drivers and infrastructure design/signage, not weather conditions (a different can of worms). I suspect that we'll see a progression like: 1) Well-regulated urban and highway environments 2) Well-regulated rural environments…

My feeling is that under special situations 1 degradates to 5, so to have good security anyway you have to solve problem 5.

What are the special situations where 1 gives way to 5? The well-regulated part would imply to me that the possibility of slipping to another situation are eliminated or not allowed.

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

#166

Post by freyir »

aerovistae wrote: post #63

While I'm almost always bullish on new tech, self-driving cars are one where I frankly have a pretty hard time buying into the hype. I think when they really start to hit the streets, some issues are going to show up. Here's what I mean. Imagine this situation: You're pulling into your driveway in your self-driving car, and one of your kids left a lawn gnome there, blocking it. The car won't go forward because there'…

The danger in this contrived scenario is still the human driver, who is distracted and careening down the road.

If all the cars were autonomous, it would more likely to be a matter of frustration than safety: the gnome causes a traffic jam because the cars won't endanger the passenger by driving into the opposing lane. Then what? They find an alternate route? They automatically call in a service crew to clear the road? Not the end of the world.

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

#168

Post by RivieraKid »

mholt wrote: post #121

At this point, I'm not really going to be impressed until just ONE self-driving car company even talks about being able to handle snow and fog, preferably their cars knowing when they can't drive safely in the conditions. (It's not just about seeing through moisture: it's also about traction, something you can't really use sensors to enhance.)

I'm going to be really impressed even when there's one geo-fenced and weather-restricted self-driving car available for purchase.

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

#169

Post by alkonaut »

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.

Wow. I asked in another post what people were ready to pay because of all seems like such expensive tech. To me it's worth maybe $2-5k in a new car (so 5-10%) because I usually don't mind driving. I could picture myself choosing between the sunroof/stereo and L5 autonomy...

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

#170

Post by [deleted] »

tim333 wrote: post #143
byset wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't get that impression. Paragraph two says they have "the most advanced self-driving software ever demonstrated," which has been in use driving cars around in real city traffic on their prototypes or whatever (according to their youtube videos), but the article seems to be saying that they now have designed and built mass-producible cars that can run the software. (If I'm wrong, then yeah, not only the title bu…

Paragraph 2: "today, we’re unveiling the world’s first mass-producible car designed to operate without a driver" Implies L5 Paragraph 3: "The car we’re unveiling today is actually our 3rd generation self-driving car" ie L3, you need a driver paying attention like in a Tesla(?)

[deleted]
Post reply on HN