Tesla crash in September showed similarities to fatal Mountain View accident

Post by jonknee » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 3:51 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #455

jonknee wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't the whole point of autonomous cars that humans are pretty shitty drivers? If I could augment my vision with a 360º setup of cameras and LIDAR you better believe I would!

I'd say people are actually pretty good drivers. I'm more interested in autonomous for the time savings than I am for the potential safety improvements.

Post by jonknee » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 3:52 PM UTC

pkulak wrote: post #465

jonknee wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of Tesla apologizers talk about how it's such a bad design, but people seem to be able to dodge it successfully and so should Autopilot. It seems like this feature should require hands on the wheel until it has enough training data that it doesn't do things like smash you into an obvious obstacle in whatever lighting conditions are possible at any time .

> this feature should require hands on the wheel It does.

Post by unityByFreedom » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 3:54 PM UTC

jakobegger wrote: post #468

gfodor wrote: post #462

For all those who are clamoring for autopilot to go back into the lab consider this: I have autopilot, and I use it the way people are instructed to. I consider it a companion to my driving, a backup co-driver that has better reflexes. I am in control, and mentally steer the vehicle with my hands on the wheel with the machine. We are driving the car together and I overrule the machine when we disagree. Often the mach…

Why not the other way around? You do the driving, and the computer is the backup in case you mess up? Humans are extremely bad at monitoring monotonic things, even if we are trained to do them. That‘s why trains have elaborate dead man switches to ensure the operator is paying attention. From these accidents it‘s clear that Teslas aren‘t good enough at making sure the driver is paying attention. And it‘s also pretty…

Post by bobsil1 » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 3:58 PM UTC

delroth wrote: post #347

bobsil1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo’s approach is also brittle, e.g. to changes in the road since the last map pass. Tesla also uses radar and ultrasonic. Lidar isn’t necessary, just makes depth measurement easier. It’s lower res than cameras, low range, power-inefficient, conflicts with other lidar. Humans drive fine in sunlight, without a coherent IR scanning beam.

How do you know how much Waymo's approach rely on maps vs. vision? My expectation would be that maps are really only used for "macro" navigation but anything beyond that (lanes, avoiding obstacles, etc.) would be done on the spot. Do you have any public source detailing this or do you just make this claim based on your own assumptions? (Disclaimer: I work at Google but have no idea how our self-driving cars work.)

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 4:05 PM UTC

josefresco wrote: post #335

Auto-pilot will put massive pressure on states and municipalities to improve road maintenance - specifically lane indicators and fixes to "peculiar" roads/intersections etc. This will increase budgets, which will in turn create massive opposition to self-driving autos by those not wanting to pay more taxes for other people's fancy cars . I travel/drive a good deal in the summer and for a few years now have silently (…