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

201–210 of 236 posts

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

#201

Post by guelo »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #190
mulmen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Blizzard. Heavy rainfall or wind. Sudden crowd / riot / chaotic event. Pretty sure you can't legislate those out of existence. And sadly I think the fact that these vehicles are being developed and tested in Silicon Valley is either a cause or an symptom of their probably inability to deal with those kinds of conditions.

Also, accidents, road spills, random obstacles, construction, animals.

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

#202

Post by bfree17 »

Vogt like Mcgregor knows he'll get beat down but also knows he'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

Vogt is a charlatan. Most in the industry in Michigan or SF know that his characterization of accomplishments to date is false. The intended audience of this sideshow is presumably Wall St.

Normally the pronouncements of yet another American Silicon Valley type (white male huckster) startup founder are unnoteworthy. However in this case his podium and platform for reproducing silicon valley (ethics, chauvinism, racism) exists due to a taxpayer financed bailout. Interestingly that toothless loan was made possible by America's 1st Black president thereby reminding us that the devil in America takes many forms.

So there it is. In America in 2017 under the guise of technological advancement we have people subsidizing their own disenfranchisement.

And if you thought GM had enough still they ask for more tax breaks from California. GM turned a deaf ear to a legistlator's request for demographics of their engineering workforce.

Devil wears skirts too!

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

#203

Post by seanmcdirmid »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #190
mulmen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Blizzard. Heavy rainfall or wind. Sudden crowd / riot / chaotic event. Pretty sure you can't legislate those out of existence. And sadly I think the fact that these vehicles are being developed and tested in Silicon Valley is either a cause or an symptom of their probably inability to deal with those kinds of conditions.

Erm, china has more than a dozen well funded self driving efforts, some of them by very big companies (baidu). Those are being tested in places like Beijing, you never hear of them because you aren't looking outside of the USA.

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

#204

Post by jvolkman »

bobsil1 wrote: post #196
inverse_pi wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking about the tail end of the distribution. If self driving cars can solve 90% of the mass of the distribution, i.e. driving on highways and urban streets, it would be a significant improvement in terms of efficiency. Of course there will always be morale questions like the one you proposed. But quite frankly, the return on investment of solving the tail end scenarios like that is really small.

You can't ship without restricting where the car goes, punting edge cases to remote drivers, or actually solving the tail end with AGI. Actual full self-driving is far more satisfying than "you can go from here to the airport" or "you can drive in downtown SF."

But actually shipping a product that can operate autonomously in a subset of areas and conditions is more satisfying than not shipping a product at all.

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

#205

Post by adrianmacneil »

senatorobama wrote: post #197
adrianmacneil wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cruise employee here. I'm sorry to hear you feel that way. In my experience, Cruise is one of the most exciting companies to be working for today, and Kyle is easily the most intelligent, hard working, and reasonable CEO I have worked for. For sure, there is still a lot of work to be done before we can launch a full L4/L5 vehicle, but I would say with high confidence our platform is ahead of most other players in the…

This sounds a bit like damage control to me, but > Kyle is easily the most intelligent, hard working, and reasonable CEO I have worked for. Couldn't you be in a different management hierarchy to this purported employee?

Not damage control, just providing an alternate opinion.

Yes, it's entirely possible that the commenter is (or was) an employee in a department other than engineering. We all report to CEO eventually though, so I don't think that would result in a significantly different experience.

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

#206

Post by bobsil1 »

jvolkman wrote: post #204
bobsil1 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't ship without restricting where the car goes, punting edge cases to remote drivers, or actually solving the tail end with AGI. Actual full self-driving is far more satisfying than "you can go from here to the airport" or "you can drive in downtown SF."

But actually shipping a product that can operate autonomously in a subset of areas and conditions is more satisfying than not shipping a product at all.

True, I’m a Model 3 fan :)

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

#207

Post by bobsil1 »

bjtitus wrote: post #144
irq11 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no ethical question here. You either see that it's a gnome, or you see that it's a child. Humans may or may not be less situationally aware overall, but we have the gnome question down cold. Cars don't. They see "obstacle in front of bumper radar." The OPs point is well-taken because it illustrates a technical risk that few are discussing: the "last 1%" of self-driving software may be equivalent to solving AG…

I do think the "last 1%" may be a very hard problem to solve, but the majority of crashes are simply people not seeing things or making bad decisions. "Recognition Error" and "Decision Error" are the two most frequent categories of accidents which basically boil down to not seeing obstacles while performing a maneuver (changing lanes and not seeing a vehicle in that lane, turning and failing to see an oncoming vehicl…

Because a half-baked product is dangerous (re: handover to human) and unsatisfying. You really want the version with no steering wheel. I’ll take the intermediate one, but let’s work toward the good one.

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

#208

Post by mulmen »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #190
mulmen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Blizzard. Heavy rainfall or wind. Sudden crowd / riot / chaotic event. Pretty sure you can't legislate those out of existence. And sadly I think the fact that these vehicles are being developed and tested in Silicon Valley is either a cause or an symptom of their probably inability to deal with those kinds of conditions.

I wasn't suggesting legislating the conditions out of existence. I was thinking that kind of situation could be considered in the regulation. Much like VFR flight conditions a self-driving car would not operate in heavy rain/wind or low temperatures.

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

#209

Post by mulmen »

guelo wrote: post #201
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blizzard. Heavy rainfall or wind. Sudden crowd / riot / chaotic event. Pretty sure you can't legislate those out of existence. And sadly I think the fact that these vehicles are being developed and tested in Silicon Valley is either a cause or an symptom of their probably inability to deal with those kinds of conditions.

Also, accidents, road spills, random obstacles, construction, animals.

Road spills, random obstacles and animals all have to be dealt with for any of this to work at all. Construction can be considered in the regulations and self-driving cars can just be restricted from auto-drive mode in construction areas.

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

#210

Post by bitL »

bobsil1 wrote: post #200
bitL wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually that case would be detected as two objects on a collision course and car would stop/slow down. Mind that sensors scan surroundings with high frequency and some of them can see "beyond the walls" like radar. Ultrasonic sensors can also detect the state of road surface (dry, wet, icy etc.).

Yes, but when can the car proceed, and in which direction? Helps to know what a wheelchair, a woman and a chicken are and how they behave. Helps to be able to speak with them. Superhuman sensors will be great, but you really can't dodge AGI for true full self-driving.

It's probably super easy for the car to stop and open the window for a person to talk ;-)
Post reply on HN