how do you convince the midwest to use self driving tech? maybe start with nascar?
I think you start with a a commercial product, which doesn't exist right now.
Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
91–100 of 181 posts
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#92Every paper that comes out of Apple gets disproportionate coverage! If nothing, their secrecy is helping in generating good publicity.
I definitely agree with you, but have to add that my (amateur's) take is that this paper has actually contributed a lot. Not only have they shown marked improvements in detection accuracy, but also come up with a trainable model/framework for object detection/classification using only LIDAR point clouds (i.e. without the addition of additional sensor data such as RGB overlays). Not relying on a second (or 3rd, or nth) sensor or hand-crafted features is very impactful to the field.
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#93There was a time when I thought of regulations as progress killers, but I find myself shifting on that and getting nervous every time I hear about self-driving tech. It's great stuff, but I really do not want my family to be the brave eggs we had to crack to get to the omelet of a driverless future. I now _like_ that someone somewhere has a book listing chemicals that aren't allowed to be shipped on an airplane, and…
I know you just want to keep your family safe, me too. But consider my case. I have NO traffic tickets on my record, but I recently started taking a medication that could cause sudden blackouts. I am still allowed to drive. I also have an ADDICTION to mobile games. I try to limit my playing to stop lights, but if traffic seems light, I will try to get away with crushing a few candies while driving. Studies have shown…
I think this is mostly a regional problem. In some parts of the world, you'd be arrested for using your phone while driving -- and quite right too!
This danger can be largely (unfortunately not totally) mitigated just by passing laws to prohibit dangerous driving, and enforcing them sensibly. It also helps if people agree that the rules are sensible and self-police them -- as happens in many countries with seat belts, for example.
I agree that self-driving cars should improve safety, but the idea that they're the only way to improve safety is just wrong.
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Driverless trains have been here for a while. They're great. With platform-edge doors, nobody can fall or jump onto the track, not to mention that they increase brake cooling efficiency and decrease air resistance (less air to push). But of course you weren't talking about trains. I see this sentiment a lot on HN that self driving cars are going to fix everyone's transportation woes, but I'm not convinced that they w…
Not sure what rail services are like where you live, but in the UK it's about 50/50 whether it is faster to travel between major cities by car or by train. Trains can go faster but this is often counterbalanced by needing to slow down to come to a stop, etc. There will always be places that can't be reached with public transport and even in cities like Paris renowned for their public transport it is often necessary t…
[deleted]
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason why consumer/enterprise software is so lightly regulated is that very few people die when mistakes are made. (Embedded, especially medical, is a different story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 ) Meanwhile, cars (and roadways designed for high speeds without proper pedestrian accommodations) have been the #1 cause of injury deaths for kids for generations: https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/Leading…
I would love to see the numbers you pulled out of thin air for your statement on deaths caused by software. I've met at least one developer who quit the profession because they were writing code that "would probably lead to someone's death."
> they were writing code that "would probably lead to someone's death"
Versus cars, where I'd be shocked if there's a single mass-produced model that hasn't killed someone.
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#96how do you convince the midwest to use self driving tech? maybe start with nascar?
You have a car show up at their house every morning that's heated and ready to go? Even in car-centric environments people will want to save money and be able to use their phone instead of drive.
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incorrect. Look at applied computing for medicine/healthcare, those things are strictly regulated and analyzed because of their potential to harm. A 0.001% overflow in your twitter app makes you restart your phone, a 0.001% overflow in your pacemaker means you die. Immediately.
I realize these regulations exist, my point is they come at a cost and that at some point the costs can become prohibitive. As I mentioned below the argument isn't just theoretical, it's why the term "medical tourism" exists. I believe reasonable tradeoffs could be made in theory, but I also believe the appeal of regulatory capture is too alluring for wall street to pass up. And when the people who need these devices…
the argument isn't just theoretical, it's why the term "medical tourism" exists.
Can you explain that in more detail? What's the connection to regulations? Does medical tourism exclusively happen from countries with heavily regulated medicine to countries with light regulations?
I would have assumed it was more about the distinction between state-run same-care-for-all healthcare systems versus commercial pay-to-play systems. If you have the money and you need the care, of course you're going to pay for better service if possible. But that seems orthogonal to regulations.
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#98Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
A big difference is accountability. If you get into an accident and kill someone while playing a mobile game or taking a medication that says, "do not operate heavy machinery while taking this," it's clear who is at fault, and it is relatively easy for the state and injured parties seek sanction and redress through the justice system. So what about an algorithm that has been given the regulatory green light and fails…
This is an inaccurate description of the Tesla system. When you use it, the car repeatedly tells you that you have to stay alert, and it forces you to have your hands on the wheel most of the time.
Then perhaps it should not be advertised as "autopilot".
Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Driverless trains have been here for a while. They're great. With platform-edge doors, nobody can fall or jump onto the track, not to mention that they increase brake cooling efficiency and decrease air resistance (less air to push). But of course you weren't talking about trains. I see this sentiment a lot on HN that self driving cars are going to fix everyone's transportation woes, but I'm not convinced that they w…
Not sure what rail services are like where you live, but in the UK it's about 50/50 whether it is faster to travel between major cities by car or by train. Trains can go faster but this is often counterbalanced by needing to slow down to come to a stop, etc. There will always be places that can't be reached with public transport and even in cities like Paris renowned for their public transport it is often necessary t…
I'm confident in saying there's zero chance that self-driving cars, on their own, could replace the London Underground. Zero.
The Underground (and commuter rail that feeds into it) carries a vast number of people every day. There's just not enough road space to get that many cars in and out, even if they were 2x or 4x more efficient.
If you want to fix the Underground (although it works fairly well so it's not clear why drastic changes are needed) you need to start thinking about buses and bicycles, staggering working times to avoid rush hours, moving jobs outside the city so people don't have to commute in at all, that sort of thing. None of those actually needs AI.
Self-driving cars (and especially self-driving buses and minibuses) can certainly be part of the solution, but they're not the solution.