Live data from Hacker News

Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

theverge.com

141–150 of 256 posts

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imho, companies need to collaborate on certain aspects like perception instead of competing. I also work on self-driving cars. Why would I share technological innovations with another company?

So people don’t die. This is an example where companies could put people over profits and share what they’ve learned to keep things safe. I don’t see a lot of research papers (I see none) coming out of Waymo, Tesla, Uber, or Cruise.

Is there a business model for providing detection data to other fleets in real time? This is a stretch of the word "collaboration" but it could possibly prevent deaths while leaving the IP in the hands of the company.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#142
post #60

> “Rather than building AI to solve the pogo stick problem, we should partner with the government to ask people to be lawful and considerate,” he said. “Safety isn’t just about the quality of the AI technology.” Wow. What a goal post move. I don't think this is how successful technology spreads. Governments usually accomodate tech because it proves itself in the market, not vice versa.

It was done for automobiles.

"Fighting Traffic - The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City" By Peter D. Norton

> Summary

> The fight for the future of the city street between pedestrians, street railways, and promoters of the automobile between 1915 and 1930.

> Before the advent of the automobile, users of city streets were diverse and included children at play and pedestrians at large. By 1930, most streets were primarily a motor thoroughfares where children did not belong and where pedestrians were condemned as “jaywalkers.” In Fighting Traffic, Peter Norton argues that to accommodate automobiles, the American city required not only a physical change but also a social one: before the city could be reconstructed for the sake of motorists, its streets had to be socially reconstructed as places where motorists belonged. It was not an evolution, he writes, but a bloody and sometimes violent revolution. Norton describes how street users struggled to define and redefine what streets were for. He examines developments in the crucial transitional years from the 1910s to the 1930s, uncovering a broad anti-automobile campaign that reviled motorists as “road hogs” or “speed demons” and cars as “juggernauts” or “death cars.” He considers the perspectives of all users—pedestrians, police (who had to become “traffic cops”), street railways, downtown businesses, traffic engineers (who often saw cars as the problem, not the solution), and automobile promoters. He finds that pedestrians and parents campaigned in moral terms, fighting for “justice.” Cities and downtown businesses tried to regulate traffic in the name of “efficiency.” Automotive interest groups, meanwhile, legitimized their claim to the streets by invoking “freedom”—a rhetorical stance of particular power in the United States. Fighting Traffic offers a new look at both the origins of the automotive city in America and how social groups shape technological change.

~ https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/fighting-traffic

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#143
post #27
post #22

This is tangentially related, and something I have wondered, so I will ask it here. Does anyone know how self driving cars will react to attempts by law enforcement officers to pull over the vehicle?

They will pull over.

Have any of the major vendors documented this? Otherwise, citation needed.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#144
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i like that this essay puts the complexity of the brain into perspective, but the distinction between a computer and an organism is kind of arbitrary. brains are physical systems that can be modeled mathematically. if you can create a mathematical model of a thing, you can execute that model on a computer. a brain isn't a classical computer, but that doesn't mean that a computer can't simulate a brain. we currently l…

I don't think it's arbitrary. You even distinguished in this comment between a brain and a simulation of a brain. Steel is a physical system that can be modeled mathematically. Accurately simulating steel doesn't make steel.

Agreed. I think radioactive decay is an even better example of a well modeled physical system that defies simulation. A simulation of an ounce of decaying uranium won't tell you which atoms will decay in which order in a physical chunk. Ergo, somethings defy simulation.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#145
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out waymo's videos; the car detects the flashing lights + reflective fabric on the police officer's uniform, as well as the shoulder and arm gestures. Griefing is as much an issue as is police impersonation right now, that is a very rare occurence that will be punished very severely when occurring.

How many different police uniforms do you think there are in the world?

Have a look[1]. Observe how they all kind of look like each other regardless of the country: shoulder pads, head cover, belt, uniform colour, formal attire, etc. Once the model knows the baseline, that is "a uniformed individual waving characteristically in front of the car", don't you think it would be quite easy to teach it with a mere few hundred pictures how local police officers look like in the current region?

1: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-different-police-uniforms...

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rodney Brooks has a history of skepticism about AI (said in 2009 that he doesn't think AI is even possible), as does Gary Marcus (who's been anti-deep learning since 2011). "AI is hype" hit pieces always quote them.

I assume you are trolling, but in case someone misses your user name: To say that the director of the MIT Artificial Intelligence lab for ten years and the founder of the a successful AI workstation company and the most successful robotics company in the world "has a history of skepticism about AI" is idiotic.

not trolling. I don't think you know Brooks well enough, i've been following him since the 90s. Rodney Brooks is famous for his subsumption architecture and disregard of statistical methods. Because of the failures of Marvin Minsky GOFAI, the previous director of MIT AI, he went in the opposite direction completely and became highly skeptical of AI while serving as MIT AI head. This was the AI winter days of the 90s.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#147
post #86
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they'll be able to undercut ride sharing prices Why? I see comments like this constantly. But does anyone ever do even a basic spreadsheet to explain the unit economics of this argument? Low skilled people who can drive are pretty cheap and plentiful. Even if self-driving tech is flawless (spoiler: it's not and won't be soon) it still only replaces part of their responsibilities. Someone will still have to clean th…

Uber currently pays these "low skilled people" ~75% of the fare which leaves a lot of headroom to lower prices and still pay for vehicles and cleaning. Rental car companies show how few people it takes to maintain a very large fleet of vehicles and it will take even fewer if they can drive themselves (an autonomous car can go through a wash on its own, charge itself, show up at a detailing station on demand, etc).

What is the makeup of that 75% number?

Does that number reflect an analysis of the cost of the actual human work of driving the car only, or is that just the number for average actual remittances from Uber to the driver?

If so it includes assumption of capital risks, auto depreciation, gas, tire wear, broken glass, vandalism and cleaning, traffic tickets, maintenance, towing, and every other expense of physically delivering the ride.

Getting rid of the human driver only saves real money on driving labor. The payments to drivers have much more to them.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All due respect, have you used any of the Autopilot clones? There are endless debates about what's better on paper, but everybody I know who's actually used them says Autopilot is much more mature. Comma.ai seems to be right on their tail, but it's an aftermarket system requiring a fair bit of DIY (so it's not very accessible yet for most end users). Tesla was first to market with auto steering, and seems to have the…

As someone who has used Autopilot and many of its "clones" as well as worked with several OEMs on these features, Tesla's offering is not more mature, it's more irresponsible. Autopilot is a combination of ADAS features that many other OEMs have had for a while and deliberately chosen not to tie together due to safety concerns. These concerns have been validated multiple times now by Autopilot errors. The "clones" ar…

How mature a system is and whether it's morally responsible (or imperative) to release it are different questions.

> The "clones" are deliberately less good because the manufacturers offering them care more about safety and reliability than about marketing beta products.

When I say "maturity," I'm not talking about holding back features. I'm saying that Tesla's system works better in situations where other manufacturers offer similar features. For example, how many other manufacturer's TACC will slow down (below the set limit) when a turn is coming up and then accelerate through the turn as a human is taught to do? How many autosteering systems will sense an adjacent car drifting from its lane and "creep" away from it to avoid a possible collision? These are the sorts of mature behaviors that put Autopilot ahead of the pack and make it much more real-world useful than its competitors.

On irresponsibility, I passionately disagree. But rather than rehash a bunch of old discussions I'll just link to prior comments explaining why I feel the way I do, and we can debate it further in those comments if you're interested.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17302164

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17233845

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16773903

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17236608

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All journalists covering the self-driving car beat are basically required to ignore Waymo so they can continue writing “When will cars drive themselves? Experts say nobody knows” articles. If you ignore Waymo it’s a race; if you include Waymo it’s not. This article makes the further error of assuming “AI” is required for self-driving cars, rather than just a shitload of code.

>> “When will cars drive themselves? Experts say nobody knows” articles. Nobody knows because it has yet to happen. We have all seen demos and studies but that doesn't convince anyone not involved in the tech. Cars will be capable of driving themselves when I see one, sans humans, ask to merge in front of me on the highway. It will happen when I see one navigate the lineup to the ferry I take every week. It will happ…

> So put them on the road. Let's give it a try. Maybe it works. Maybe it doesn't and people die and they sue. That's been part of driving since day one. Roll the dice. I'm sick of the endless debates.

Well I'd certainly hope that there is a high level of confidence that they don't kill people BEFORE they're put on the road with other people.

Re: Self-driving cars are headed toward an AI roadblock

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All journalists covering the self-driving car beat are basically required to ignore Waymo so they can continue writing “When will cars drive themselves? Experts say nobody knows” articles. If you ignore Waymo it’s a race; if you include Waymo it’s not. This article makes the further error of assuming “AI” is required for self-driving cars, rather than just a shitload of code.

>> “When will cars drive themselves? Experts say nobody knows” articles. Nobody knows because it has yet to happen. We have all seen demos and studies but that doesn't convince anyone not involved in the tech. Cars will be capable of driving themselves when I see one, sans humans, ask to merge in front of me on the highway. It will happen when I see one navigate the lineup to the ferry I take every week. It will happ…

> Maybe it works. Maybe it doesn't and people die and they sue.

Jesus... Let's kill people because you're sick of the debate on whether self driving cars will work.

Post reply on HN